The Bureau's Medical Director concurred in the hospital’s opinion and in a
report dated April 16, 1970 he said:
In this case I feel that the decrease in white count, particularly the
neutrophiles, represented a biological monitor and was the result of the
long term radiation exposure. With removal from radiation sources the
white count is improving. I have no further recommendation except
CASE NO. 40
those provided by [the hospital], that is, removal from radiation
pending return to normal of the white count, with periodic blood
checks.
Type of Injury: Epidermoid Carcinoma, Dorsum of the Right Hand.
BEC’s Decision: Claim Approved. No compensation; Nofost time; No medical
On May 6, 1970 the claimant’s white blood count was 5,600 and he was
The Bureau has determined that [claimant’s] disease is related to his
124
~—
ee —*-@ Oe
Se —Oq —4q,--Oe
co
~
a—
ep
exposure as an X-ray technician since 1948.
ee
BEC's Decision: In allowing the claim the Bureausaid:
expense, No permanent disability, and No residual of the injury.
ee eet
reassigned to his previous position in the X-ray department of the hospital. In a
statement dated October 1970, the Bureau’s Medical Director noted claimant’s
blood count had returned to normal. He also pointed to the possibility of
latent effects reappearing after further X-ray exposure and he said “claimantis
protected by his claim should he in years develop a myeloproliferation
disorder”.
Date of Decision: 1971.
Claimant’s Allegation: tn March 1970 claimant filed “information” concerning
his injury with the BEC “as a matter of interest to BEC and others interested in
the incidence, prevalence and natural history of those exposed to ionizing
radiation”.
Facts: Claimant was a physiologist and assistant to the radiologist at a
Government hospital. In April 1969 he noticed a lesion on the dorsum ofhis
right hand. It was removed and diagnosed as a well differentiated epidermoid
carcinoma. He continued to work as there was neither residual recurrence nor
dissemination of the lesion. On March 4, 1970 he retired on disability for
cardiac insufficiency, Since he had accrued an excess of 3,000 hours of sick
leave he went on sick leave, and on the same dayhefiled “information” with
the Bureau concerning the lesion in question. The information was treated by
the Bureau as a claim.
Evidence showed that between 1946 and 1959 claimant had performed
“hundreds” (between 15 and 20 a day) of fluoroscopic and X-ray examinations
on mentally ill patients in the T.B. unit of the hospital as part of
gastro-intestinal tract studies. He used no film badge and wore no protective
gloves. Since all the patients examined were mentally ill their behavior or
inability to cooperate in positioning for the examinations made it necessary for
his protective gloves to be removed. Claimant alleged that he had had no
significant exposure to fonizing radiation prior to 1946. The old vertical
fluoroscope was later condemned and all the X-ray equipment claimant worked
with was disposed of. However, the fluoroscopic unit with which the claimant
had done most of the pneumothorax and pneumoperitoneum examinations
was described by a radiation physicist as “hazardous”. In a Protection Survey
report of 1958 on the fludroscope in “Room 1010, Radiography and
Fluoroscopy, Medical Surgical Building” the machine was described in
pertinent part as follows:
This room contains a Keleket 300 ma multicron with a Keleket type
C table adjustable from trendelenberg to upright. The room is used
principally for fluoroscopy with some general radiography. Fluoroscopy
is carried out at 65-95 Kvp, 4 - 5 ma and there is a 3mm A!filter in the
ASS
125