exposure to radiation, the facts of this case do not lend themselves to a conclusion that significant radiation exposure occurred in this case. As stated in the expert opinion, the lack of exposure information on the veteran in the records of the Atomic Energy Commission is of considerable significance, since records were kept on all persons potentially exposed to significant doses of radiation in connection with their work. Service connection for leukemia consequent to radiation has been allowed by the Board in some previous cases on the basis of this independent expert’s opinion. His negative opinion in this case, and reasons therefor, carry considerable weight because of his expertise, and his opinion is shared by the members of this Board on the basis of an independent review of the record. CASE NO. 24 Type of Injury: Leukemia. Severe Anemia and .Acute and Chronic Lymphocytic BVAS Decision: Denial Affirmed. Date of Decision: 1967. Appellant's Allegation: That veteran’s condition was caused by X-ray treatment received for shrapnel wound suffered while in the service. Facts: Veteran was injured seriously by shrapnel in 1945. He received transfusions and some diagnostic X-rays to diagnose the extent of his injuries and of complicating pneumonia that he had during the course of his post traumatic care. Though he had some disability from these wounds and injuries he was discharged from the Army and did not work as a farmer until 1963 or 1964, In the fall of 1964 he became incapacitated to the point that he was unable to continue his activities. He did consult a physician. It was found at this time that he was suffering from a leukemia. In spite of therapeutic measures attempting to control the leukemia, he worsened, developed a profound anemia secondary to this leukemic process. As a result of the anemia, he developed a circulatory collapse and died. Medical Evidence: The case was referred to an independent medical expert for his opinion on whether (a) there was etiological relationship demonstrated between the service connected woundinjuries, including treatment thereof and the development of leukemia and (b) there was a reasonable medicalbasis for concluding that service connected disabilities affected the veteran’s physical condition to the extent of being a material influence in producing or accelerating his death. His opinion is as follows: It is the contention, as | understand it, of [appellant] that [veteran’s] disability suffered in the war (with the necessary employment of X-ray examination and transfusions) resulted in his developing a chronic infection which persisted, weakening him so that he was unable to stand the rigors of his leukemic process and succumbed. There is the further implication that the use of transfusions and the modalities of X-ray were so experimental at that time that they may have had somecausative effect in his developing a leukemic process. I am unable to agree with [appellant’s] contention and | completely support 80 81