Document DDvLvbNepnB0Q6dgGvanBG7bn

February 4, 1965 L. Golberg, Director The British Industrial Biological Research Association Woodmansterne Road Carshalton Surrey England , - "* * Dear Doctor Golberg: I have just replied to your letter of January 25th, but my reply has no,t been posted, and I hasten to include a note on th subject of your query of January 29. I took note of the article by Moncrieff and Clayton when it appeared, and have since had my attention drawn further to it by several persons here and abroad. It seems likely that I did not deal with it altogether effectively, but I wrote to Sir Alan and later, after his some what non-committal reply, I wrote to Barbara Clayton. I feel sure that neither of them understood fully the significance of my comments. Perhaps I was too gentle, or, perhaps, my letter and certain sharp remarks should have been addressed to the editor of the Archives for publication. In any case, I am not sure, at the moment, what if anything further I should do or say, and to whpm or through what channels I should direct any further remark. The problem is that these authors have not had the experience, nor the familiarity with the literature, to write such an article as they attempted. Their work and their writing are full of faults, especially those relating to unfamiliarity with present knowledge of the subject. They, in common with a number of otherswriters on the subject of lead poisoning, have no prpper appreciation of the quantitative aspects of exposure, dosage absorption, body burden and excretion. Their analytical procedures and their Interpretations reflect this ignorance of the difference between precision and approximation. It is most unfortunate that this confusion should be introduced into this subject at the very time that it appears to be well on the way to elucidation in a number of important respects. I shall consider your suggestion for writing a letter for publication. I cannot do so at the moment, for the reason that I have asked for advice on this in another direction, and until I receive it, I am hardly in a position to act, I shall do something soon* however, and I'll either follow your suggestion or let you know the alternative. With kindest regards, * Sincerely yours, RAK:raeh Robert A. Kehoe, M.D. T h e British In dustrial Biological R esearch A ssociation pr e sid e n t : Professor A. C. Frazer c b e , m d , d .sc , f r c p c h a ir m a n o f c o u n c il : Sir Owen W ansbrough-Jones k b e , c b d ir e c t o r : L. Golberg d .sc , D.phil, m a , m b , B.chir, er ic se c r e t a r y : J. A. Bey m a Our reference: Your reference: LG/LJB/Ed/4674 W oodman stern e Road Car sh alt on Su r r ey Tel: Wallingtorf 6626-9 29th January, 1965 Professor R.A. Kehoe, Kettering Laboratory, College of Medicine, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati 19, Ohio, U.S.A. . Dear Professor Kehoe, I wrote to you the other day concerning BHT, but omitted to mention another topic that may be of interest to you, namely the work on lead poisoning published by Moncrieff and Clayton of the Great Ormond Street Childrens Hospital in London. This has created an enormous furore in the press, radio, television and consumer circles. As a consequence, many of our industrial members have been seriously embarrassed by the measures taken over the minutest trace of lead present in plastic toys, when such lead is not extractable on chewing those toys. Furthermore, the panic over lead has resulted in the substitution of barium and cadmium. This has satisfied local Medical Officers of Health but, as you can imagine, makes me profoundly unhappy. /2. .ook A h e a d w ith L e ad 2 I feel sure that you will agree with me that the paper which started all this was a thoroughly bad piece of work, and it is disgraceful that a reputable Journal should have given it such prominence. I am wondering whether you would care to let us have a letter on this subject for publication in our Bulletin and in "Food and Cosmetics Toxicology". Thanking you in anticipation. With warm regards, ' Yours sincerely, L. Golberg. 0001585 SI M O N D . S T R A U S S , PRESIDENT R O B E R T H E N D R I C K S , VICE PRESI DENT J O H N M E T C AL F E ' VICE PRESIDENT H . J . W H I T S O N . VICE PRESIDENT ROBERT LINDLEY ZIEGFELD EXECU TIV E VICE P R ESID EN T AND TR EA SU R ER D AVID M. BO R CfN A SEC R ETA R Y AND A SSIST A N T TR EA SU R ER 3 9 2 MADISON AVENUE NEW YO RK. N . Y. 10017 ARE A C O D E 212 O R 9.6020 January 26 , 19 6 5 DON G. FOW LER D IRECTO R O F H EALTH AND SA FETY Robert A. Kehoe, M. D., Director The Kettering Laboratory University of Cincinnati College of Medicine - Eden Avenue Cincinnati, Ohio A-5219 Dear Bob: I thank you for your letter of January 22 and your comments on the English reaction to the article by Moncrieff and his associates. Evidently I was under a misapprehension as to the nature of the comments which you had already made about the article; I thought you had written for publication to the journal. This puts a somewhat different light on the matter, and I will write back to our friends in England and explain the situation to them before I ask you for anything specific in the way of assistance. The British Lead Development Association, previously referred to as "our friends", are quite concerned over the image that lead is obtaining in England, just as we are here. Apparently the Moncrieff article has been widely quoted and referred to in the English press, and I gather that this is extremely unusual for them. In any event, let me come back to you with some more specific suggestions, if I may, after I hear from England. Very truly yours, DGFrmd cc: Morgan H. Davies Don G. Fowler ook A h e a d w ith L ead