Document 5kx6goyenaQ3JGzoZY5QV1rdJ

ETHYL CORPORATION INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE TO Dr. R. A. Kehoe FROM Mr. J . H. S ch aefer SUBJECT Lead Hygiene PERSONAL & CONFIDENTIAL ADDRESS ADDRESS DATE C in cin n ati New York January 28, 1946 yJt haoenuur Lasreytarda1i4IgnhIdctofumaosmrmtwr vei eanestrridyngAmvsiouesncwohctshioaeobtnilomi gnt hae. dt e is rItiosaualmybwojucehecifctroh.t ar Ii ny sol yeunr gt lleat odt t eytoor u gofefrtom wtpghasiosaoroiaedtinnhktsogw.oe nfuioitttlnhsrletotiabhotbesewIeemishnfAltuivefclseaahlsptltoourapcenasrivoodgbamaeeltectilteorhawynttthohitoaoatitnosmndtcehmogo.oicfnascettaIerthlaertoennahrndeiangdvasoweclyuwuroonrnuicstotlthehsdtielotdlqhibafiukepnaiemcltoekowotgmpasomryptoaoauotltdrhienetfcuidtannmulgeytpylhysoemtiuinwamyfmnheoemdarravemitentader ofer ealnItagmounsitsImsae.mle gIc otwinthigleltoml eedtdoiuymosoumthkenatohtwinwghiolwalbmnoouatttticetar,suseporfoancgyoreucsross.en,trobvuet rsy 3-2 bcMYMgtFheoeeoreen,busadtrrtiWiLfrucnviraeaboigearelruyrdmnyttAehsdI7esgnatrstohPDdtooot.urchdySt.siotoa.ahtputArtiildiusaoIebIibnnsse,sccj utuuSApeDobsysrrrssmettj.sahespoaireiPconcvnentesiecl,itatyueaetmyaiinirvnonofsduewnei ndhalhfattnoiihosscndartehmhfrooct haewatfaaehr.tflliiellcyawsrlHeossufarubyoboIwaewjmcpetewioslcvlah1uFatlensa0lerdsobr,:l0eceifxvId0of oenlt ehdoWricrynaneei dodtrrhrnsTjemoeunep.hdsobiouenAtisrrisIsttmktoldsaynutneanowogryitwinbl,coidaygaunl.ldl y 03474 Page 2 - Dr. R. A. Kehoe - January 28, 1946 wWvBitnhiaheovatawuottilnsdtayIwytRoioucohouourincguphgeldtlioavyannoesdusseomtmwwweiereotaorneet'euxc,tptameab.lneneldtaIbobwmnacoaaomktuyuhtluldbiesaenanltivadakinitlneIgyethoatnoceoutkrnrenk1eonte8howtawethlroelwdo6ipegtfhhelsaudFttgfeoyicbnosorrounumtCvahteoerheylnuio.inmeffkonbcTtruheeoshegfissaooniintd.g . 03475 January 14, 1946 PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL Mr. J. H. Schaefer, Ethyl Corporation, Chrysler Building, Nev York City 17. Dear John; I have noted the material from the Lead industries Association forvarded vlth your note of January 2 and am returning this material herewith. I have a few comments to make which are for your own Information and use, and which for a number of reasons I should prefer you did not transmit to Felix Vormser as coming from me. He may assume that they have come from me If they are mentioned to him, and although that Is not a matter of great Importance I should prefer that you deal as diplomatically as possible with comments that I am making, Bince I do not want to be misunderstood, especially in relation to the attitude of this Laboratory on certain phases of an experimental program on Industrial lead exposure and poisoning. There ..is one respect In which these discussions, which continue to come from Vormser, are a source of some irritation to me. I have never heen..0abl,e.;to, understand why Lead Industries Association through Vormser had not Interested themselves directly and financially In he work of this Laboratory. It appears that they have money to Invest in experimental work, inasmuch as they appear to be considering favorably the project at Johns Hopkins. Obviously I am interested in investigative work on this subject anywhere it can be done, but in the present Btate of information about what is being done and what is proposed at Hopkins this looks a good deal like wlldcattlng. If Lead Industries Association has this much money to spend on a projeot of this sort, one would suspect that they might be interested in investing something in experimental work thus far prosecuted to the advantage of the entire lead industry, wholly at the expense of Ethyl Corporation. This may sound like professional pique and it would be so, interpreted by Vormser I believe, and therefore I speak :only to you; but to continue the discussion, Lead Industries Association is apparently willing and anxious to.- continue their investigations at Harvard University. Now Felix and Joe Aub and some others would not like me any better fox* saying so, but the money they have thus far invested at Harvard has gone down a rat hole. Practically the entire work of this group has been demonstrated to be inaccurate, the fundamental conclusions have been> shown to be unsound,and actually the work introduced confusion rather than '*'! Mr. J . H. Schaefer - (2) - January 14, 1946 clarity in an important matter. This is harsh criticism, and it is apparent that Aub and his associates are not to be criticized too severely for errors in method and procedure, at a time vhen both method and procedure had to take an uncharted course. The fact of the matter is, however* that the work resulted .substantially in incorrect conclusions and in unsound theories. For some reason or other nobody is willing to face these facts. However, let me make a few specific points. Fairhall, associated with Aub, developed an analytical method which was an advance over anything available at that time, but which turned o.ujt to be completely inadequate for the investigation of the problems involved. Therefore the demon stration of a number of important facts had to wait until new and satisfactory methods could be developed. Second, on the factual basis, this experimental group said categori cally that there was no normal or incidental lead expososure on the part of individuals outside the lead trades. The failure to recognize that this was not true was responsible for misleading much of the other subsequent work, resulting in false conclusions. Some years later we were able to demonstrate not only the existence of normal lead absorption and excretion but the sources thereof and the magnitude of the quantities involved. Third, Aub and his associates established for their own satisfaction that lead was stored in substantially inert form in the skeleton as the result of some pre-existing accidental or occupational lead exposure. Ve have demonstrated subsequently beyond any question that lead which they were dealing with in the skeleton was to a large extent the normal incidental lead absorbed into the tissues and held in substantial equilibrium there by virtue of the regular daily Intake and absorption of reguler unavoidable quantities of lead in the food and drink of normal Individuals. Fourth, they were unable to measure adequately the urinary lead excretion, and by reason of their failure to recognize the quantities and the source of lead in the feces they interpreted the alimentary lead output as actual excreted, le a d . This fact served to confuse the issue when, they began to study the demobilization of lead, and they arrived at the false conclusion that lead could be demobilized from the body by suitable therapeutic means. Ve have demonstrated quite conclusively the error of these conclusions. Moreover we have shown vhat was never previously known or recognized, that'-lead excretion in the urine vis closely related quantitatively to the rate of current lead absorption and that the rate of urinary lead excretion could be used as the measure of lead exposure in industry as veil as the lead absorbed under conditions of exposure from any source. This opened up the whole field for the adequate measurement of industrial lead exposure, and clarified certain features in the diagnosis of lead poisoning, which had only been confused by the Harvard work. In this connection, if Vormser has any doubt about where this present Mr. J. H. Schaefer - (jj - January 14,'1946 " approach to this problem originated, one might ask him the following: 1 . What work established the relationship'of urinary and blood lead concentrations to lead absorption and, therefore, provided the modern diagnostic tools? 2. Who devised the methods whereby this was accomplished? Who established the facts pn the basis of which occupational lead exposure is now capable of being*estimated with reference to its significance? ' 4. Who established the quantities and the sources'of the normal lead exposure in the modern community? The answer to these questions would be interesting, and I should like to be outside'in a corner if these could be asked Wormser as a basis for establishing an opinion as to whether their investments at Harvard over the period of the last .twenty years had not been substantially a'waste of money. No one of the important facts on which -the modern concept of lead absorption and lead poisoning is based have come out of those investments. One would Buspect that a man as intelligent as Wormser might wake, up to this fact. Or perhaps he thinks he is purchasing prestige from Harvard University for his Association. Nov I like Felix'very much and I have respect for his honestyand capability in a number of matters, but I cannot:understand to save my soul whether this performance is just stupidity of whether it is something1else . In the meantime while Lead Industries Association has been conducting itself rather inadequately, Ethyl Corporation has 3pent something like'a half million dollars obtaining facts which have benefitted the entire industry, but toward which no other part of the induetry has contributed a penny. This is not strictly true; but is so nearly true that it can be accepted as substantially1a fact. -I cannot but feel,' therefore,4that you as a responsible official of Ethyl Corporation might properly ask why you should contribute'to further investigations'that'have hitherto been unfruitful;....... w M1- -- - *1*' *` In this connection with reference to the Hopkins project, no one knows better`than I that attempts to procure, an antidote; for lead poisoning will be of consequence medically speaking. However, from the point of. view of-industry this is not'very Important ".'"The'job of-industry is1to preventJlead`poisoning; not,to"treat it. , The methods o f vprevention are reasonably clear, b u t 'they can be improved. Improve ment, however, in my opinion, will depend upon a more.fundamental understanding o f -the behavior of'lead when absorbed`under, varying conditions of occupational exposure. This is the problem we have been studying systematically for many years, not because ve are not tempted by euch problems as that with which the people at Hopkins are concerned, but rather because ve believe firmly that the infor mation of which ve are in search ip of much greater importance in (t&i 03478 Mr. J. H. Schaefer - (4) - January. 1 4 1 9 4 6 _ the solution of the problems of industry., During the next several jears ve are planning to undertake a comprehensive investigation of the fate of ,particulate lead as dust and fume when inhaled . regularly over a long period of time. This will be costly yor^ and it will take years to obtain anything like a satisfactory answer. This information is needed by Ethyl Corporation in connection with its responsibilities to its employees and. to the public , Hpwever, these responsibilities are identical with those of the lead trades in general, and therefore this work should not .have to be paid for exclusively by Ethyl Corporation, but should be supported by the lead industries. It is not clear to me why Wormser would need to be told this. It seems so utterly obvious as to require no comment. . This is the only laboratory in the world that is equipped to,do this, j o b . That this is the case is not due to me or the staff of the. Labora tory primarily, But 1b due to the generosity and foresight of Ethyl Corporation, but why, I wonder, should Ethyl Corporation have to supply the.foresight as well as the money for the entire lead industry?" .fl , ' VJ', . ... Obviously you can say as mud}, or as little as you., like about what I have said in the, foregoing paragraphs. .1 have simply lvet.. down my back hair and,have talked'to you as a friend as I,would not,think of speaking professionally to any group or individual. 1 am merely presenting a point of view, which :is saip neither,tactfully,n o r , wholly sympathetically perhaps. However,'I,'believe what I have said is the straight truth without any personal or. professional bias* Insofar as you care to use it, as o- guide for your own thought and action you are welcome to i t ., If you prefer not Wo-say-anything about it, or,, if you po not agree with it in t'o'tP,* ignore it completely. In any case, .this is written to you in confidence,;and,I would not want it to be'quoted i n `whole, or in part. ,V Finally, with' reference to the policy of Lead Industries I would advise against a campaign o f 'propaganda directed from offlcial sources, not because it would not have facts on which to go but rather because it will inevitably be regarded as prejudiced to some-degree. The clarification of the situation about which Felix is complaining will come about only through published scientific work presented to people who are capable of criticizing i t ,through,the normal.dignified scientific channels . I ,agree that Lead Industries, Association is entitled to a greqf respecf... It will have this,respect in limited informed circles. However,.in these days,of.advertising balljhoo, and propaganda' in the worst acquired meaning, of that term, ,the public in .general will .regard the, publication and speech of Lead Industries Association along these lines,.in somewhat the same light that they consider Soap Operas and radio advertising in.general, This is unfortunate, but it,is inevitable and in these times unavoidable. .` ' Sincerely yours, . KAK ef Eobert A . Kehoe, 5f7 d 7 p- 03479 tirr 11 February 1946; Ur. Felix E, Wormser Secretory and Treasurer Lead Industries Association 420 Lexington Avenue New York 17 New Toxic Lear Felixi Beturnlng herewith your notes of the meeting, which cover proceedings very well. As you may gather from my memorandum of 7 February 45, X believe! A. That on educational program aruet be backed up by a systematic re* search program closely related to it. . Plans for such program should emerge from deliberations of people with knowledge of the lead industry, research, and the medical profession) the direction the research takes not being determindd entirely by these who will prosecute it. m /rl Sincerely, Willard Machie, U.S.