Document 71b9m9bwnYvVrRQMka12E9r6E

FILE NAME: JH DATE: 1980 Nov 18 DOC#: JH015 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Letter JH from AIA RE J-M Suggested Modifications to the M.A.P. Criteria for Diagnosis Document fV " A ' - ASBESTOS INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION (Limited by Guarantee) oil GLOUCESTER PLACE, LONDON WiH 3HL, ENGLAND Telephon?;: 01-466 35:18fg Telegrams: ntug London; 2 6 t Telex: ag8< 18 INTA G 18 November 1980 Dr S F M cCullagh James Hardie & C o .P ty .L td Box 219 P ,, 0 ., G ranville New South Wales 2142 AUSTRALIA 7)0 : AIA/20/7/16 k . o v 'M A t Dear Terry Jimmy S ta c k has a llo w ed me to see you r l e t t e r o f 1 3.1 1 -8 0 co n ce rn in g the J.M . suggested m o d ifica tio n s to the M .A .P . c r it e r ia fo r d iagn o sis dociment. This'-'Ireached me on my r e tu r n from the w orking p a r t y 's m eetin g in Derive-r 'la st w eek, where we had a most u s e fu l d is c u s s io n o f our " t r a i n i n g " 'document''and dem onstration s o f a u d io -v is u a l m a te r ia l. JjA t <one ' s ta g e the d is c u s s io n was widened by m utual co n sen t to a c o n s id e r a tio n > o f th e ' M. A .P , " c r i t e r i a " document. Had your l e t t e r been a v a ila b le to form .;>;a .b a s is -fo r our d is c u s s io n o f both the J .M . and the M .A .P . v e r s io n s , much ^4`argumenR'would have been u n n e ce s sa ry . D r s ;K o tin , W right and P au l were g ra v e ly concerned about our paragraph 2 ,1 :.ion X -ra y " fin d in g s y p a r t i c u l a r l y the s u g g e s tio n th a t fin e shadows o f p r o fu s io n ''To jpjl/O'/were ^ .d ia g n o s tic .o f a s b e s fc o s is . In t h e i r view t h a t ..Statem ent .unde C..'.the'., fia e g is ^ 'o f .'such a p r e s t i g i o u s body as the M .A .P .' or the A . I . A . "in Europe'"'(the f f :: p h ra se was t h e ir s ) co u ld g iv e p o w e rfu l ammunition to those te n d e n tio u s ;^ opponents who would then quote as a d ia g n o s t ic c e r t a in t y what inform ed ^ m e d ica l o p in io n re g a rd s m erely as one. in d e x among o t h e r s . :k s.: iii'M1i! : '.4 ! "The d if f e r e n t ia t io n between the c l i n i c a l and the e p id e m io lo g ic a l approach Jwas 'emphasized in D e n v e r, j u s t as i t has been in d is c u s s io n s in the l .K . j.F o r t h a t 'reason the J.M . medicos were r e lu c ta n t to r e ta in the Preference to . .the I . L . O . - sta n d a rd s l e s t the e r r o r be compounded by those who do not a p p re c ia te the need fo r com paring any film w ith i t s predecessors ra th e r than w ith a r b itr a r y .standard film s. -! Your agreement w ith the m odified statem ent in th e ir 2.2 as expressed in the Y'liV -"sixth paragrap h o f y o u r l e t t e r in d ic a t e s how w e ll you too a p p r e c ia te the s u b tle d iffe re n ce s in d ia g n o s tic approach. I fe e l co n fid en t th a t the acceptance of i L th e ir paragraph 2 .2 w ill enable a l l o f us to r e a lis e th at the im portance o f t h is m o d ific a tio n makes o th e r minor p o in ts fade to the le v e l o f e d it o r ia l ^ d iscretion, ' Y .. 77'