Document 4a2mQLb2gk2Dd2Eap0YjXrrqV

S' f . ~rh I July 26, 1955 C-cZ/7'} -St- - e ^ 1 \ I welcome your letter on the related topics of pulmonary function and asbestos. As.you Imow, we are actively working with Dr. Keeld of Chambers Works on s practical pulaoasry function testing program and we have also bees studying the health of the pipe coverers. At this time I should like to see Chambers Works used as the site for a pilot study in "routine" pulmonary function testing, and Kith the experience gained there we will be able to make v recs=sndations. for the use of Du Pont plants in general. The asbestos situation in Du Pont Is a difficult one to assess due to the relatively small number of people exposed and tbe difficulty of determining the exposure either in terms of the type of material involved, the duration of the exposure, or its intensity. 1 am keeping Informed on the.various studies now going ahead on the health effects of asbestos, but no re'sults are expected from these for several years. What is needsd to bring the Du Pont study to a meaningful conclusion is a detailed study of personnel records to define at least the length of exposure. Zt is very doubtful that dust concentration data can be obtained for past exposures, and even for current closures it presents some technical difficulties due to the long thin fibers being such more difficult to count than the usual dust particles. We have carried out the studies to date on our own funds but I think a contribution froa the operating depart* sents should now be requested. Your interest in these topics encourages me to hope for a very fruitful series of Joint studies between Easkell Laboratory, Sidney Pell's group, and the plants. I am enclosing, as a matter of interest, a memorandum prepared in late 196b as a Justification for a pulmonary function testing program. The arguments used then are at least as valid today. * !JJ5OftlOINM. SIONC9 BY O. J. ' GJS/dyb Enclosure - 0. J. Stepps, M.S.,B.S. Chief, PhysiologySection qiH Cp DUP 0900521 t20537 SC-DP-01320