permitted to resume his work as an X-ray technician. His blood picture
neither represents the effect of radiation nor does it make him any more
liable to X-ray damage than the next person.
The hematologist also reported at that time that claimant’s past medications
CASE NO. 43
Type ofInjury: Leukopenia and Lymphocytic
Leukemia.
BEC's Decision: Compensation Granted.
Date of Decision: 197}.
Claimant’s
1 Allegation: That het husband’s
death was causall
i
occupational exposure to radiation prior
to 1962.
wy Felated to Ris
Facts: The decedent was a X-ray technician
at a gover
nmen
i
i
records indicated he had been a hospital attendant
for about ieven wh
October 1946 he filed a claim for tuberculosis
which was accepted by the
Bureau. The tuberculosis was treated by
pneumoperitonium procedures
without drugs. During the period of treatment
he had multiple X-ray exposure
made in connection with a fracture of the femur
. Claimant’s medical histor
further showed that he was hospitalized in
1958 for acute maxillary sinusitis
and bronchial pneumonia. Just prior to admis
sion he had been treated for the
sinusitis with chloromyce
tin one gm. four times a day. In
1961 he was
hospitalized because of a four year histor
y of leukopenia with the white count
ranging between 3,000 and 3,300, a marke
d depression of neutrophils and a
relative lymphocytosis. A bone marrow done
at that time was non-specific. In
1962 the decendent filed a claim alleging
that his persistent low blood count
was the result of occupational exposure. By
1962 claimant had worked as an
X-ray techni
cian for about sixteen years, both while
in the armed services and as
a civilian, Radiation exposure records from
1956 to 1961 showed I rem with a
minum exposure in 1960 of .99 roent
gen, equivalent to approximately 990
included occasional polaramine, achromycin, and declomycin but that “He
never received chloromycetin, any of the chlorothiazide, anti-thyroid,
antiepileptic treatment.” He further stated:
There is an infiltrate in his marrow of mononuclear cells that
resemble lymphocytes. They do not look particularly malignant or
granulomatous. The exact diagnosis is uncertain at this time.
The radiation expert offered the following opinion:
The film badges indicate a total exposure of 4.1 1 in 5S years.
Supposing total body exposure and moderately penetrating radiation
this would give an average absorbed dose of about 1.3 rads—an integral
dose of nearly a tenth of a megagram rad. The average absorbed doses
from his diagnostic radiography plus the fluoroscopies give a total
integral dose of about two megagram rads in sixteen years.
In estimating the chance of harm from the claimant’s absorbed dose the
radiation expert then said:
The British spondylitis cases indicate doubling of the natural
leukemia rate by a total absorbed dose of 7.5 megagram tads. The
leukemogenesis appeared to be mostly between one and six years after
exposure. Since no leukemia had appeared in the first twelve of the
sixteen years observation in [claimant], it seems we should calculate
recent and future chance of leukemia on only the last third of his
exposures, i.¢.,on 0.7 megagram rads,
If one takes a linear extrapolation, this dose-about a tenth of the
doubling dose—would give 5 chances per million of leukemia (per year
for 5 years) a total of 25 chances per million.
Medical Evidence: A hematologist and a radiat
ion expert were asked for an
opinion on causation. The hematologist repor
ted in July 1962 that claimant’s
hematologic findings had no connection with
X-ray exposure and hesaid:
He further pointed out that if one thinks the leukemogenesis goes as the square
of the dose, this would miean that one tenth the doubling dose would give one
hundredth the natural feukerogenesis, i.e., one quarter chance in a million and
he said:
The blood count on July 9, 1962, was normal
except for a moderate
granulocytopenia. A sternal marrow aspiration
obtained the ‘same day
disclosed excellent overall cellularity. Howev
er, the granulocyte
precursors were decreased in number and the lymph
ocytesincreased. No
primitive, abnormal, or malignant cells were seen.
There was a fair
amount of marrow hemosiderin. (The radiation
expert] and { have
discussed
A more understandable way to put it is this: If [claimant] develops
leukemia, one estimates the chances ate one in ten that the X-rays were
this man’s X-ray exposure and current hematologi
c picture and
are convinced there is no connection. We both
agree that he should be
134
the cause ofit. Or, if you adopt the quadratic relationship, one chance in
one hundred.
The chief of radiology service at the employing hospital reported in 1962:
I have carefully reviewed all the evidence on [claimant's] condition
including numerous blood counts on him... It is noted that a rather
135