Document 44Mp2zr60zG2EQyrDqwYn0x0j

r American Petroleum Institute SO WSST both struct NSW YORK 20. N. Y. February 2, 1953 P0ir Sir. As requested, in your letter of Hcveafcer 19, the rlevs of the Medical Advisory Committee meaberehlp on the report and reconsendatione of the Working Group are transmitted for your consideration, as follows: 1, That portion of the report, as well as the first recosnenda* ' tion, dealing with the epidemiological phase of the Kettering project constitutes encouraging support to recownendations vhlch have been considered and advocated repeatedly hy the committee. The meofeers need and welcome the assistance of refining executives In the compilation of adequate standardized records for the petroleum industry. 2. The balance of the report and the recoosendatlon for an investi gation of the epidemiology of cancer in other industries lack definition necessary for a critical review; however. In principle, the meters deem it unwise for the American Petroleum Institute to Initiate such a project. It seems unnecessary to recite the many difficult problems Incidental to such an undertaking. For your Information, the aiders of the Subcommittee on Carcinogenicity of the Medical Advisory Committee, by letter ballot in 8eptenfeer 1952, expressed considerable doubt as to the wisdom of extending to employees of customers the epidemiological studies of cancer by the Kettering Laboratory under the sponsor ship of the American Petroleum Institute. On behalf of members of the Medical Advisory Conaittee, I express my sincere appreciation for the Interest shown by members of the Study Conaittee and its Working Group In thle subject. Very truly yours. To Members Medical Advisory Conaittee E. Kern Linder, M. Dr~ Chairman, Medical Advisory Conaittee API 05564 EB 005308 SC-API-2235