Document VGd99e2Y6VY8VmnLy1BV0zM8g
FILE NAME: Raybestos-Manhattan (RBM)
DATE: 1934 Dec 10
DOC#: RBM104
DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Letter from Vandiver Brown, Johns-Manville to Met Life Insurance Co. RE Preliminary Study of Asbestos Dust Effects
plaintiffs
EXHIBIT
December 10, 1934
Dr. A. J . Lanza, Metropolitan Life Insurenee Co., 1 Madison Avenue, *- j
New York City* .. . '
. ^ " Ret - Preliminary Stuc^- of - ' ' Asbestos Dust E ffects '
Dear Dr* Lanza* \ >;f, - j- , . ^
- * *. .
^
I have examined the galley proof of yours and
Dr. McConnell1a preliminary study e n title d Effects o f the
Xnhalatiori_of Asbestos Dust cm the Lungs o f Asbestos Tiorkere*, '
which you were good enough to send me with your l e t t e r o f Decem
ber 7th, and have compared i t with the mimeographed pamphlet of
which i t purports to be a condensation. *
Confirming ny telephone conversation o f th is ;
afternoon, I am planning to transm it the proof sheets to Mr. V
Hobart so th a t he w ill receive them tomorrow and sh a ll request
th a t he return them to me not l a t e r than Thursday with h is com- '
ments, a f te r which I sh all see th a t they are promptly transm itted
to you. 1 ^shall also inquire o f'th e Rayhestos Company whether
o r not they desire to examine the proof of. t h e .a r tic le before i t s
f in a l printing and sh all endeavor to persuad them not to i n s i s t '.
upon such an examination.
V
" . " 1 have tha following comments to make* -
(1) Conclusion No. 1 (galley. 14) has omitted a
,.
sentence appearing in the o rig in al which, as ; . -S 1
c
modified by you, read aB follows* C linically, - >:
. :
from th is stufy i t appeared to be of a type
milder than B ilicosie".
* ; .
(2) There i s also omitted the f i r s t paragraph on
1. '
page 15 of the o rig in al re p o rt which reads as .
'
follows*
.[
v
During the progress of the stu fy , physicians who were practicing in the communities where asbestos workers liv e d , were questioned, and stated th a t they did not find an un
usual amount of tuberculosis among these workers. The contrast between th is sta te of a f fa irs and th a t found in communities with
a s ilic o s is hasard, I s noteworthy*
Both the foregoing observations included In your ,
o rig in al report presented an aspect of your survey th a t was
favorable to the industry and we should lik e to pee them re
tained*
(3) On galley 14 the word death* has been omitted a fte r the phrase *6 of 36%
(4) Conclusion Ko* 3 (galley 14) The word "preliminary* i s Inserted -- to ry mind unnecer sarily -- since the
e n tire a rtic le is d efin itely Rebelled a t the com- - " .mencement as a *prel iminary" stucfy*
(5) Referring to the la s t sentence of the th ird paragraph . ; on page 18 (which i s not changed in the galley proof)
it'seem s to me th at some so rt of additional phrase or
clause is required in order to relate i t properly to
what has gone before As i t stands now, i t is not "
en tirely clear ju st what one i s e je c te d to deduce
therefrom ?
V.
^
Very tru ly yourB
SB*T .
CC| Hecsrs.Qeorge 8 Hobart fe,M. Voorhees S,A m i i a a s -
. Vandiver Brown ... ,, ' Attorney '