Document kaaaKM2qLLQ9pJkaMOKYw4Gd0

FILE NAME Industrial Hygiene Foundation IHF DATE 1957 Dec 30 DOC IHF071 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION Letter from Manville (oY ry ry , 4 St. ~ CIPPINES CIPPINES Jouss MASVILLE GORPORATION GORPORATION ENGE ENGE TWH RAST HUFFERTE STREET 7 CTR EIBLN Cota me SN . . - - wr . t . * . a Mr. Ivan Sacourin __, Quebec Dear Ivan aa . . . ; { . . . : . . a, ; . e ee ~& 7 m_ e Hugh Jackson and I have reviewed the condensation of the survey which you sent us We have noted deletion of all references to the association of asbestosis and lung cancer in this condensation While we believe that this information is of great scientific value we can understand the desire of the Q.A.M.A. to emphasize the exposu ofrte he asbestos ziner and not the cases of Rabestosis We also are in agreement with the deletion of the reference to smoking and lung cancer 2 It must be recognized , however , that this report will be subjected to subjected today criticism when published because all other authors today cerrelate lung cancer "AG cases uf asbestosis. iners greater emphasis If we should are to restrict this condensation to asbestos be placed on the choice of words used in defin- ~q=e the concrt The fact that all members of the cohort had 5 or more years of exposure to asbestos should be reiterated . . . Following are cuments on certain paragraphs of the condensation Pare ene . ry . cd We believe the first sentence in paragraph 2 should read Ferkzps ne , une has written so extensively ' - - = . . Page 14 In the third sentence of paragraph 2 the definition of cohort should be expanded to expresize that exposed personnel were not included in the campic This might be done by auding a sentence sigilar the following uffice and other exposed personnel regardless of length of employment were not includes , in the coners To further cmpunsize the exposure aspect of sentence of paragraph 2 might read All workers with Gaure were placed in one of three categories the miners the second more than 5 years of ex- . . graph It might be lo previously advisable to add another sentence at the end of thisthis noted workers with no exposure were not included in the parto esta 7 . Page 23 | HD HD 72, In the fourth sentence reference is made to the 95 level of signifi- phraso elsals Carice This vas explained and thoroughly on Pages 23 to 25 in t suction on Statistical Methods of the original survey because this whole sectio was deleted in the condensation we feelit might be advisable to explain by fos note the meaning of the 95 level of significance . Wo feel that the firth sentence might be made stranger by the fellowing However change hypothesis therefore the cases having found just 12 that asbestos miners we are not do not have above this level and a higher mortality frm is population lung cancer than does the general cannotbe rejected Pare 41 a - The table in the center of the page shows a rate of 271 in the 45 - SL age group In the oroiginral iginal survey this rate was 27 ; Face 48 ; a , . In the last sentence of the first paragraph we would like to suggest th substitution of word undertakes for the word commissione ; In the second sentence of paragraph 3 we would like to suggest thatthe the elnments of cohort definition be of asbestosminers having at least 5 repeated A cohort years of exposure in was the defined indstry as a group and who wer in the industry during 1950. Caly these workers who set these criteria were ine cluded in the study Face 19 t like In the last sentence of paragraph 1 wo would to paragraph suggest phrase tion of the which have been explained in some detail since was deleted in the condensation the dele- such explanati This publication should form asked Dr. Braun should be to establish Grainger and Cartier so that each year the the the basis for framework status of future surveys and reports of reporting for Doctors every member of the original could be reported to the Industrial Hygiene Foundation and the continuing cohort study be analyzed by their experts We cannot emphasize this point too elrong because nowhere in the literature today is there reported a study which is valuable and which approximates this magnitude so have probably agree with Doctors Cartier and Braun Uat a certain mumber workesan some asbestatic fibrosis which cannot be diagnosed by ray Un- , fortunately we cannot take lung biopsies on all workers and we have no other Seans of making a diagnosis before there are ray changes Therefore the am study of all exposed asbestes workers becomes increasingly increasingly important We feel that Dr. Braun and his staff are for thisthis very valuable contribution to our medical Y efforts will be rewarded in the near future by the recognized journal to be heartil knocwloedngge ratulated priblication We knowledge priblication trust that the this work in