Document e7JJ5YLO466ZmnG3zYzLeaOyg

COMMISSIONERS: REUBEN G. BENZ, YAKIMA ALBERT CUtLLIER, ROUTE 8. YAKIMA C. A. HAWLEY, ROUTE 2, WENATCHEE J. W. HEBERT, Ya k ima 8. E. HENDRICK, OMAK W. 6. MARTIN, WAPATO FRANK P. SHINN, EAST FARMS J. M. WADE. We n a t c h e e HUGH WILCOX, TlETON C. M. WILD, Ch e l a n C. M. ZEDIKER, CASHMERE Wa s h in g t o n St a t e Ap p l e Co mmis s io n Wenatckee, Waskington February 9, 1942 OFFICERS: C. H. ZEDIKER, CHAIRMAN W. S. MARTIN. VICE-CHAIRMAN C. E. CHASE, TREASURER EX OFFICIO COMMISSIONERS: ARTHUR E. COX DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE F. E. DESELLEM SUPERVISOR OF HORTICULTURE C. E. CHASE, Se c r et a r y -Ma n ac Robert A. Kehoe, M.D. Kettering laboratories of Applied Physiology University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine Cincinnati, Ohio Dear Dr. Kehoe: I very much appreciated your letter received this morning. I think the com ment in connection with the quoting of your letter in the spray residue reoort is entirely consistent, and feel that you were taking a very broad attitude in passing it over as lightly as jrou Cad. There is no question but what in the report which was sent to Secretary Wallace the case wanted to be as strong as possible, without in any way being untruth ful, and it does develop now, as you explained to me, that there undoubtedly is considerable difference between the findings on lead and what they would be on arsenate of lead if conducted in a similar manner. I thoroughly agree with you that research along this line should be undertaken. Am very hopeful that the latter part of your letter may be correct and that the matter of a hearing may be held in suspense until after the war. There have been several meetings here of representatives of different organizations, which I have attended, and strong resolutions have been drawn up asking our State Department of Agriculture to intercede with the Federal Security Agency to liberalize its enforcement of the present administrative tolerance because of priorities and difficulty in securing washing machines and repair parts and possibly also some of the chemicals used in washing apples. The Food and Drug have made seizure of at least two carloads of apples from this State that considerably exceeded the a,dministrative tolerance, and as far as I know the apples have been destroyed, while Mr. Campbell frankly ad mits that it would be very questionable 'whether the fruit would damage public health, regardless of the tolerance, yet the seizures took place in Georgia and the growers involved are not financially able to go to court in the matter. This, of course, would involve a long discussion, but nevertheless out here where apples have been consumed for a period of at least thirty years and dur ing many of these years no attempt whatsoever was made to clean them, I person ally have never known 'of a case reported by any doctors or anyone else of a person becoming ill from eating sprayed apples. The Public Health Service in its report mentioned that many of the apples consumed in this district carried twenty times the amount of residue permitted in interstate shipment and that WASHINGTON STATB APPLE ADVERTISING COMMISSION Robert A. Kehoe, M.D. -2- February 9, 1942 Apples that exceed the tolerance permitted under the administrative ruling are pretty generally consumed -within the State. This not only applies to Washing ton but also to Ohio and Illinois, particularly, with no damage to public health that I have heard of. It therefore seems rather inconsistent that these apples which are not damaging to public health within these states are seized and destroyed when they are shipped to Georgia or someplace else across state lines. The feeling on the part of the producers, of course, is that the Food and Drug Administration is simply trying to substantiate its previous enforcements during these many years. Another point that the committee here is raising is to ask the Federal Security Agency to grant postponement of any hearing until after the present anergency. I feel that the work of Dr. Ruth, Paul Stark and myself in connection with the Food and Drug administration and officials of the Federal Security Agency is far in advance of what this committee is proposing. Nevertheless, I am work ing vith them and trying to concur in their requests whenever possible as I would like to see the matter carried on in a dignified and conservative manner rather than to have a lot of newspaper publicity, such as you mil note from the clipping I am enclosing which cannot help but be damaging to all concerned. I am also enclosing a reprint of an article which appeared in the December issue of Hygeia Magazine, which you have probably read. I think that informa tion of this kind, together with the results of the Public Health Service in vestigation, particularly their bulletin No. 267, that can be gotten out to people who have had conflicting ideas on this matter cannot help but be effec tive and should ultimately result in the issue being less controversial than it has been in the past. Your letter was greatly appreciated, and also the time you gave to me when I called on you in Cincinnati. It was a visit that I will long remember,- and the definite information you had from ycur investigations was not only par ticularly interesting but has been very helpful to me in my own views. Sincerely yours. CEC:o C. E. CHASE, Secretary-Manager 0008491