Document 3wx88qz6Omeoq6wgL0M3Kb40

CLINICAL SCCTION Oc DR. EO I3AR V.'ALLEN 2 R. NELSON W. BARKER DR . EDGAR A. HINES. JR. d r ;.Wa l t e r f . r v a l e OR.ftlCHARO M.SHJCK I-774-02 MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER. M INN ESOTA March 19, 1S47 Dr. Bobert A, Kehoe Kettering Laboratory of Applied Physiology University of Cincinnati Cincinnati 19, Ohio Dear Doctor Kehoe: tc write me about your patient, Mr. of Dherir.opolis, Wyoming, for I can assure 'you thaT"we" do not wish to.be in error. Your letter has been considered in deteil by Doctors Eeersema end Pucker, who have replied in considerable detail, none of which 1 need to include in this letter. They are both grateful for the information vhich you have brought to i. \heir attention All of us here at the Clinic are extremely anxious that our opinions be in keeping with the best avail able medical opinion. You have helped to support this goal. Sincerely yours. *oup , of some > for you ;o do so. ' attention 's tending - associates il controversy, lion of leaded gasoline ;ly, it appeared, group. A >unt of diffi?rsy and have created .nal analysis >rof essional ,y that these ices of opinion '3 occur, but ir colleagues a term, of ..dequacy of lize also lents made >r-iously. e that no ;ticing physiiciated vith Lerefore, I risk of case in ling, an it, developed . _intact vith this case came In April of 19^5 vhen I received 1 practicing ophthalmologist in Denver, concerning he had been consulted. Subsequently through the letter from the case, on inquiries of a vhich a