Document jgq65bd1XEjNQ9rJEgv6K63nO

Willard Storage Battery Company MAIN OFFICE AND FACTORY 246-286 E. 131ST ST. Cleveland 1, Ohio March 10, 1952 Robert A. Kehoe, M.D. Kettering Laboratories 2den Avenue Cincinnati 1$, Ohio Dear Doctor: My inquiry to you on this date is in regard your opinion of the urinary porphyrin test in the detection of lead absorption. Our oresent program at Willard Storage Battery calls for monthly history and physical examinations on all vrorkers exposed to the lead hazzard together with stipple cell counts. Blood and urine lead concentrations are determined when indicated. The question arises whether urinary porphyrin determinations can safely replace stipple cell counts. I believe I am familiar -with most of the literature in recent years regarding urinary porphyrins in lead absorption. In discussion with my colleagues in lead programs elsewhere in Cleveland, I find hesitation to adopt its use because of lack of authoritative opinion. Because the test is apparently easy and cheap,* although no more reliable than smear methods, I should like to adopt its use, after a period of trial and experience, if it can safely replace smear methods, 1 can see no added value in it otherwise. Should your answer be in the affirmative, could you render an opinion on the method used by Doctor A. L. Brooks of the Fisher Body Division of General Motors as described in the September, 1951 issue of Industrial Medicine and Surgery? Very Sincerely, WILLARD STORAGE BATTERY COMPANY HDP:emb Herman D. Pocock, Jr., M.D.