Document MJdKDOg343x6Zkkv124xrmBV9

June 19, 1961 Hr. Kan R. Daremus Chief Industrial Haalth Research Section Merck and Company, Inc. Rahway, New Jersey Dear Kent Enolosed arc two reprints of the publication by Joe Treon on the taodoity of Aroelars 1242 and 1254. Although we don't have similar data on Aroclor 1246, we would expect that the effcots of repeated Inhalation of Aroclor 1246 would vary only In degree as compared to the effcots from inhaling the other two materials. You will recall I mentioned on the telephone that the numbers desig nating the different Aroolors Indicate percentage of chlori nation. Specifically, Aroclor 1242 Is biphenyl chlorinated to 42 per cent, Aroclor 1248 la biphenyl ohlorlnated to 46 per cant, and Aroclor 1254 Is biphenyl ohlorlnated to 54 per cent. We have never heard of any acute or subacute effects from the Inhalation of the Aroolors following accidental exposure as might occur from breaks or leaks In heat transfer appli cations. We do know that such breaks have occurred on a number of occasions with unknown amounts of Aroclor being volatilised in the workroom, depending on the temperature. It la quite likely that if workmen expose themselves without respiratory protection to vapor concentrations that were highly objectionable from the standpoint of Irritation and odor, nausea, headaches, and eanoelvably some transient liver Injury could ooour. In the oases which have been described to us, the signs of any effects were never reported as more than headache and nausea. MQNS 090353 p. nm n MU 2 - Juna 19, 196I Whan Joa Traoo mi at Mattering, ha did mm aouta atudlaa with Arooior 1248. A auaaaary or hia axparlaanta and our lntarpratatlon ara aneloaad (varlfaxad ooplaa). If I oan ba of any fUrthar aaalatanaa, plaasa lat am know. Slnoaraly youra. EPWidh Enoloauraa 3 Elmar P. Whaalar Asalatant Dlraotor Madloal Dapartoant HONS 090354