Document 5DvpJG86dmBrbMggqQpbD7dOz

QCO*OC S.hCIaht . *c cqo cmOuahC t. -iha*0 AUaUlTlNC j. CLi.T jOmn j. QArrtr 3.AOODON NQtAfir Hobart Sc Minard LfirCOU^T BUIL3JNO uao furnosD aociiv^BLD >*VARK..YrW J CUSS Y clc Lm * / yy/' 7.y. Ttt<IMtAt*Sw* fOfNC 2ac. 13, 1934. Ha prwlioinaxy study of 'latropolltan Ufa Insurance Coopany 'hr. TaodlTor 2mm, '.ttar-rry, johr.a--i'anw ills Corporatian, T2 7. 4Ctb jtroet, Tow Trr': ;it7. Tear !Tr. Urownt I rooelwed 7 our 1st tar of Dceaaber 13th with eacloearoa. Including proof of the preliminary stud7 entitled, *Hff*cta of the Inhalation of vabawtoa ihiet on tha Lun<r* of latwataa Joriara*. I have carefully examined the proof and raturs aiai. Hi roadiniy this proof I hare euayarsd it with tha paper of tha same title which was prepared ty tha Doduotrial Health 3arrloo of tha 'Jotropolitao shoot throw jears ago. I submit tha following au*wartlon (Tor etnrronianca of reference r harra oaabarsd .ey coamant* is rod pencil in tha earari* af tha aerreml paupoa of tha galley proofs} (1) Cal. IX. At tha and of tha paragraph which dlacuaaea tho wtiriabiaa* trpoa which tha progre<a of tha rfiaeaaa ia IfliTuanewd. tha following oantatjea appearwi *1* nlyht wall ha asoumed that similar eariablee would Influence tha occur race a of asbostoala.* Too win recall that ia dealing with tha law Jersey Lairialatiwa Cocniseion which ham had 0harra of tha propoaad now lagialatlon ia Sow Jarway whereby aillcoala la to ha added to tha list af occupational diaoaoaa for which eerrpenaetim ia required under tha tares of tha compensation statute, wa hare conelatantly arirod that thara to a substantial differonea between alliooaia and aabaataoia -- both aa to tha allalcal oaturw of tha diseeuae and aa to the reasonable probability of Its lneldomaf and you will aloe recall that la particular wa hawa ur.ced that astestosla should not at tha oraaant tiro ba included La tha list af coepasaatlm diseases, for tha reason that it is only wlthla a eanparatiraly recant time that aaboatoala ha a bean rtcofrnired by tha medical asd scientific profoaaloca aa a disease -- In fact 00a of our principal dafmaos la actione against tha eorroaay on tha cocsaon lew thaoT7 of negligence has boon that tha selectifle and medical !crowl?dca haa been Insufficient until a wary recent period to place 1 non the o-mera of plants or factories the bard an or duty of taklae special precautions axrainet the possible onset of tha d la ease ta th.ir -TX57M.. 0403704=1 I, therefore, dislike to base this'report aurgawt that aoboatool sight be aoeumod to be *ai-ilarJ to ailieoaia, either aa ta the period - U 0 L .. . 'N . Lap, T'endiver Drown* a* of tine within which it alrht develop, ir aa to tho dosage received b7 \r. a lungs , or- au to the quantity of dust, etc* (C) Cal* 11* .t the bottom of tbid calley 2 observe that there io set- forth in a noto (lnatood of in tbs body of tb.i article) ti:a Jtatonent that appears in tbs .lonert of 1031 relating to the mlar^-xiant of tbs particle# and tbs use of logarltbutttw (Jee ? 7 of .isport of 1931) .-a a natter of curioeity 2 -vendor efcy this statement (-ohleh seens ta_o qoite inrertaat) is pat in a not# instead of in tho body of the art ids. If the antboro prefer to have it la the fora of a note, of eourse, their Judcraent oho a Id control* ae it ha * no particular bearing is any event opoo the points is -which the company is Interested* (3) Cal* 12. Tbs last paragraph os this srxllsy baa a auemry of the iu3t co-nuts -with recpoct to tho several plants. I notice that it ia stated that plant 3 wan uonecaoaarily duaty*.. I understand thio does not in any -ray rsfor to any plant of Johro--iarrvilla, but 2 aa Tcnderlnv whothor the proprietor of nlant 3 baa bad as opportunity to review the cement. It strides to that the report would a ores every purpose if ve leave out in the first line of the paragraph os that galley the words *wao unnecessarily dusty*. However, that is a nattar with thich ee are indirectly concerned and I nerely enojreat it far consitisratiot It is the sons expression which appears in the 1 sport of 1231 at page 1L* Callay 13. Ho eoaceot* (-{) Gal* 14* The word 'death* should be inserted after the vorde 6 of 3* is the third paragraph of subtitle "Insurance Clalaa*. 7<m have already called attention to this la your letter of Decanter 13 to Dr* Lansa* (3) Gal* 14 under subtitle *Conclusions*. JTo. 1. I agree with your suggestion is tetter to Dr. T-aa.-a. of December 13th that there should be added to this conclusion a statement s ini lar to that which appeared (at p* 20) 1s the Depart of 1031. naaely, Clinically,it le of a type slider than eiliceeie* -- or, if the docture do not want to sake the statement ia that positive fora* it sight bo ae follows (as suggested is your letter)t Clinically, from this study it appeared to be of a type ailder- than silicosis*! or, if that is. too strong, it night be set forth as follow#; *Uo far an indicated by tbs study i asbeetooie is of a type (or appears to be of a type) ailder than silicosis*. The tract wording ia not important, except that 2 think it would be desirable (if the doctors are satisfied that each is the fact), to have sous expression oca paring aabeatoeis with tillooels and indicating that there is a real difference between the two diseases, so far as scientific knowledge new indicates. Of coarse* here again I have in mind the nrobabllity that the '.Tew Jero*7 Commission will Introduce a bill in tbs legislature wr.ich crons In J.muary 5f 1033; and if it is tbs :olic7 of Jrb.ro--'*rrvills to oppose an7 bill that attempted to include aabestosis, as compensable, it would be very helpful to have an official rerert to shew that there io a substantial difference between asbertcoio and tilicoOior and by tbo anno to'-eu it would be troublesome if an 0403704^ -C:)2"-. ' ,lr J 7aaditr 3rowrn *3* o-'flcial- ro-ort 3ta*?*ald a"-car frm -abich tb.o csncluo ion ni -H to iiyym that tb.sre io 7 c ry little if any diffaronco bztroar. f.ro dioeaees. aa To* 2. I understand that the .statement/to the cardiac onlxrwenent la correct frcn a scientific standpoint* and I do aea hew w* can consistently objeet to it. Vo* 3. I a^Toe that the word prwliainery* la superfluous. TTo 4 # 0 - Pe. 3. This reads the saro as on poc* 21 of the Heport of 1931 ami, h<mc* It *aay be a Little Lata to object. li.serer, I point out that as :,*o, 3 new reads ths inference aUrht cs tlraen that asbestoslt dew add to tha mortality of tuberculosis cases* Uut that infsrence dose "hat seen to be Justified froo this study, I aa wonderlne if It weald be a aero accurate solenfitic statement if there were eeitted from Vo* 5 the Last three words, to-wit 'ether than tubsrrol-eia** 3e. 6. This Is the se=e ao sat forth on pa^e 21 of 2aport of 1931* with the exception that the Itaport of 1931 at the end of the sentence baa the words "ths*a free silica (3122j" and the galley proof has ths words `than granite duet-* Soro a^aln it nay bs a little late to erltldse the atatsBsnt, bnt l do not liie the suwgeetioa that there Is a possibility that asbestosis nay cauee pneumooenlotia nerw readily than jrranlte dost* Ths reason I object Is that may cases of silicosis are sapnosed to originate Is /rraolte dost and this stateneot ae It now reads sorjweta that a possibility that a pneccaeooBloots nay arise sore readily froo asbestos-- than rrsnite dnet, r thin* we should* if possible, aliulnato all that rart of coreloeim ho, d fsllowlne the owai-colon after the words* of air- in Use 2 of the conclusion. To* 7. This Is the saae ae m the P.eport of 1931. Ho eossaent. (d) Sala 14 and 13 subtitle Vlaeomneadatisne*. In ay eocy of the leport of 1931 I barre a pencil none, ae to roeomendat! on Vo* 4 to Insert the word possible* before the word "effects* so as to hare It read "as well ae stodiss oo the possible efrewte of aebsstoels on the heart and circulation** I do not thlnh the paint is of an eh iarortanee* bat I call attention to it so that it la net overlooked. I acres with the other otur^estiooe in year letter to ye, Lanza of pecenbwr 13th.