Document BKXje7bQ4pGxzXy2bBYMMdnX

April 6, 1971 John 3. Chapman, M.D., Editor Archives of Environmental Health P.0. Box 19745, Jledical Center Station Dallas, Texas 75219 Dear Doctor Chapman: Thanks .very much for your letter of recent date about the manuscript of my own which I sent to you. I understand your point of view, ana I must admit that I can find no serious fault with it. The fact remains, however, that this article should be published. It is not a ''review" article, really, but is i-ather ar attempt on my part to present, fairly, and precisely, . (when requested to do so) the last word on the clinical problem of lead poisoning, as it is seen in the United States at this time. There is probably no more confused clinical problem in medical practice in this country than this, because few of our physicians have seen enough cases of lead poisoning to know anything about it at first hand, while the literature of the subject is literally crammed with partial statements, misstatements and gross errors of fact and judgment. That 13 why S went to some length to explain matters. Thi3 is no simple matter, for we have a great deal of lead poisoning (of relatively mild character for the most part) in American industry. Moreover, the general environmental problem, right at this time, is one of the hottest matters under consideration. I do not wish to argue this case with you, but I wonder what Dave Minard could be expected to do about it if I were to send it to him as Secretary of the American Academy of Occupational Medicine. If you have any other idea on this matter than you expressed in your letter, or any other message to me, I'd appreciate your reply. Otherwise, I'll see what I can do later. Sincerely yours. RAK:wb Bobert a . Kehoe, M.D. Professor Emeritus of Occupational Meaicine 0010472