Document rxKgo05wDwGqKw478rdnRZy4q

I General Headquarters, August 29, 1933. Personal & Confidential Mr. A. R. Fisher, Manager, Manville Factory QUESTIONS ASKED ER. A. J. LANZA AND HIS ANSWERS VESEATUM Attached is copy made by Mr. Kottcairp's office of questions asked Dr. A. J. Lanza by our local physician at Waukegan and his answers; also the reccnmendations by our plant physician. I would like to have you turn this over to someone who could review this correspondence and then go over it yourself and write me your opinion of it. cc - MT. J. P. Kottcanp Waukegan Factory S. A. WXULLAK5, Vice President QUESTIONS ASKED DR. A. J. LANZA AND HIS ANSWERS VERBATIM Question Na.l. Among eleven ecployees in the Textile department, all exposed to asbestos dust, one only wears a respirator, several an being questioned claim they cannot wear them continuously especially in hot weather. Should all enployees be forced to wear these respirators whether subjected to much or little asbestos dust? Is any such difficulty experienced at the Manville N.J. J-M plant or other places of which you have Jonowledge? Answer: * Respirators are not satisfactory. It is possible to construct a respirator which will filter out fine dust, but it would offer so much re sistance to respiration that it could not be worn continuously an an eight hour shift. There are on the nazket snail face mask respirators which axe equipped with positive pressure and these are both satisfactory, efficient, nd comfortable but they cannot be worn except by a person who stands in one Jplace as they have to be hooked up with a rubber tube to an air line. I doubt if they would be practical in a textile plant. Questions No.2. Do you agree with my recorcnendation that enployees definitely be made aware of the fact that asbestos dust is hazardous to their health? My idea is that a poster be placed at one or more conspicuous places in the de partment, signed by the physician, stating that the dust is injurious, ad vising the continuous use of respirators while at work and cleansing of hands before eating lunch and after work. Your on this please and particularly is there any addi tional advice that should be given? Answer: This is partially answered by No.l. I doubt if the hazard is sufficient to justify warning posters as might be used where lead, benzol or carbon monoxide are concerned. This is especially true in view of the extraordinary legal situation. If anything is said at all, it would be better to make a general statement that the Ccnpany is taking steps to ccntrol the amount of dust in the air for general health purposes. Any acti.cn contemDlated at Waukegan would probably be influenced by the experience at other lants of the Ctnpany. > Question No.3. i 2> ' Do you regard the finding of asbestosis bodies in the sputum as pathogenesis of asbest06is? I have one errployee with x-ray and physical findings pointing toward asbestosis but not sufficiently definite that I can be positive as to whether or not she has asbestos is. However, every cne of four or five speci mens of sputum examined show typical asbestosis bodies. On the other hand, is it possible for a person to have asbestosis and not be able, with careful and thorough search to find asbestosis bodies in the sputum? Answer: The presence of asbestos bodies in the sputum only implies that the individual has been exposed to asbestos dust. I am not certain of the exact pathological significance. My impression is that the presence of asbestos bodies in the sputum indicate same definite lung pathology. I be lieve it is quite possible for an individual to have asbestosis without asbestos bodies in the sputum. Question No.4. Are you of the opinion that the added information derived from stereoscopic films of the-chest justified the procedure of taking a stereo on every case that is to be x-rayed? This is the conclusion I drew frtm Or. Fancost's talk in Chicago. - Do you oonsider it advisable and practical that an x-ray film be taken of every employee in the Waukegan J.M plant who is exposed to asbestos or silica dust? To date I have x-rayed only those cases suspected, front history or physical findings, of having asbestosis of other lung pathology. Answer: Stereoscopic films are better than single films. They are also more expensive. In our work at the Picher Clinic, we used single films simply an account of the expense involved. You can diagnose silicosis or any other form of pneumoconiosis from a single flat film. On the other hand, you can probably get a more ocnplete and accurate idea of the exact condition of any given case from a stereo. If it is the intention to determine what may be the1 extent of pneumoccniosis among employees, obviously the only thing to do is to x-ray all of them and then correlate your findings with the length of exposure and mature of the job in order that you ray get a fairly accurate idea of what the hazard is. ' Question No.5. f I have nade a diagnosis of asbestosis an an employee who has been working in the card roan of the textile department six years. This place is extremely dusty. He is not disabled. In my judgment the best disposi tion of such a case is to remove him from the dust and give him a job in sane other part of the plant. Fran your remarks in Chicago I believe this was your advise as to the disposition of such cases. Answer: It is difficult to answer this question. I think it wxild depend upon the man's age, the nature of his work, his length of service, and other considerations which might have sane bearing. If he is well along in years and shows no disability, it may be just as well to leave him alone. One of the difficulties and vexations in trying to deal with the problems of pneumoconiosis is that economic as well as production factors must be balanced against the medical factors. Question No.6. We have what seems to be an unfortunate situation existing in the fact that the textile department including looms, twisters, > pools, etc. occupies one side or about half the width of a long building, the other side of which is occupied by the packing, brake lining and other departments in which there is very little dust. The card roan, or most dusty part of the textile department is isolated by partition. Further isolation of the textile department involves considerable expense. Should or would you be guided by the dust counts and other observations in these adjoining departments? Answer: I think the answer to the situation outlined in this question is the control of dust in those processes that cause it. Wien everything possible has been hone to aooorplish this result, it may then be necessary to isolate or confine the dusty processes so as to avoid needless exposure of other employees not concerned in these processes. This is a situation that occurs in nany different types of industrial hazard. It calls for nothing more than the application of ccnccn sense to the probles.