Document jnjgL08RwpJ4gBb8QZVdoq62

August 6, 1937 D r. J . 51* Ilessio k E# X. DuPont do Hemoura and Co* DuPont B uilding T/ilm ington, Delaware Dear Doctor lies sick* I am sen d in g you h e re w ith a re p o rt of o u ^ a tm ^ s ls of a la rg e sample of u rin e o b ta in e d r o m f l | | M #1520* You w i l l n o te t h a t the re s u lts o b tain e^ o n th is saaple of u rin e are somewhat h ig h e r than th o se re p o rte d In oonneotlon w ith the sp o t sam ple. However, th is fin d in g Is n o t d a n g e ro u sly h ig h , and in my o p in io n i t does n o t m odify th e c o n c lu sio n e x p re sse d in my fo rm er l e t t e r to you. For your inform atlon , I wish to c a ll your a tte n tio n to the fa c t th a t the method o f a n a ly s is which m a r e u s in g now y ie ld s somewhat h ig h er r e s u lts than th o se which I published* and w hich X have d isc u sse d w ith you p re v io u sly * Our ch em ical method y ie ld s an av erag e lo s s o f ab o u t 0.07 m illig ram s p er sam ple, whereas the p re se n t method gives r e s u l t s which have a much s m a lle r error b u t which may be e i t h e r on th e h ig h s id e o r on the lo w . T hat i s to say* th e r e s u l t s o b ta in e d by th e method we a re now using rep resen t su b sta n tia lly absolute q u a n titie s w ith a v e ry m inute e r r o r . I f we were to t r a n s l a t e t h i s r e s u lt in to com parative terms w ith those p rev io u sly g iv e n you* we would s u b tr a c t a t l e a s t th e 0*07 th e 0.19 m illig ra m s a c t u a l l y found in the sample* On t h i s b a s is a r e c a l c u l a t i o n of th e m illig ra m s p e r l i t e r would g iv e 0.07 in s te a d o f 0*12* You s e e , th e re fo re , th a t the r e s u lt obtained is not s ig n ific a n tly h ig h , and i s n o t com patible w ith th e e x iste n c e of more than th e most minor symptomatology. Very t r u ly yours* RAKsis N14022 vcr 0012336 R obert' A* Kehoe, M.D.