RELATIVE TOXICITY OF PLUTONIUM

majority of the patients were at Strong Memorial Hospital in Rochester, New
York, where there was not only an active biomedical project under the Manhattan
District, but an active and well-managed Metabolism Unit in the Department of
Medicine.
The four others were at California and Chicago with one individual
at Oak Ridge.
The experiment was done entirely to study metabolism, not effects, and involved
primarily excretion. The results became available fairly soon in the classified
literature and indicated sufficient agreement between the excretory patterns
of man and the laboratory animals to reassure those concerned with standard
setting that there was not a huge species difference.
But the data obtained
on tissue distribution were meager and the highly classified nature of the
effort prevented any general dissemination of the information for a considerable
period.
As a sidelight on how some of these things had to be done, most of the plutonium
analyses on the Rochester patients were done at Los Alamos and only the heroic
trundling back and forth of the late Wright Langham between Los Alamos and
Rochester, by train arriving at Rochester in the inevitable snowstorm, enabled
completion of the project. The report (Langham et al., 1950) contains the
names of those who assisted at Rochester, but it was a Los Alamos report and
essentially no identification of the laboratories was discernable. Because of
the sensitive nature of the subject, including the fact that some of the
vatients defied their prognoses and have lived well into their eighties, that
report remained classified at various levels down finally to "Official Use
Only" until very recently.
Fortunately, Pat Durbin has gone back over all of
these data recently and reanalyzed them in the light of current knowledge.
Thus, you can read a modern interpretation of the meaning of these pioneer
efforts.
Short reports of distribution and excretion studies in man at the California
and Chicago laboratories appeared as "CH" reports (Crowley, et al., 1946, and
Russell and Nickson, 1946).
I do not know how long these data remained sequestered.
The other primary source of early data on the metabolism of plutonium in man
was the group of workers at Los Alamos. As you know, some of these have
remained available for the long-term study--a facet beyond the scope of this
presentation.
But there were many more than these and all were subject to
routine collection of excreta as a means of bioassay,
(Remember that the
crystal counters we now employ to detect the low energy photons from plutonium
by external measurement had not yet been invented.)
These studies of excretion in workers and correlation with animal studies led
to the formulation of the so-called Langham (1957) equation for expressing
excretion as a function of time.
Used for many years before publication, it
has served health physicists faithfully, if not always precisely, for many
years.
We now have modifications of the equations and methodology and computer programs
to check the fit of the data. But I submit that the construction and use of
the original concept and technique was remarkable when one considers how
little plutonium is excreted except in feces soon after inhalation.

The fact that the microdistribution of plutonium in bone was found early not
to be similar at all to that of radium has already been emphasized. This led
to some speculation that its toxicity--or more specifically, its effects in
bone--might not be proportional to its energy and half-life relative to radium.
But first it needed to be known if plutonium would be carcinogenic in the same
sense as radium and to what degree.
The answer came primarily, or at least first, from the Chicago group.
Among
the first of the postwar open literature publications which revealed what had
been going on in "The Plutonium Project" was a special issue of Radiology
(Anon., 1947) entitled "The Plutonium Project."' The title page and table of
contents of this now classical document are reproduced here as Figures 1 and
2.
Note first that much of the work concerns external radiation and aspects
of the project other than plutonium itself. But note also the presence of a
summary paper on the metabolism of the fission products and the heavy elements
by Joseph G. Hamilton and, especially for our purpose here, the paper on
carcinogenic properties of radioactive fission products and of plutonium by
Hermann Lisco, Miriam P. Finkel, and Austin M. Brues.
This paper established
for the first time in the open literature the carcinogenic potency of plutonium.
The paper by Bloom in the same issue summarized other effects and touched upon
carcinogenicity (see Section E. also), but it was the Finkel, Brues, et al.
team which followed through in determining the relative effectiveness of
different nuclides in producing bone cancer, as will be described presently.
Although the work at Rochester was under way at about the same time, it was
not officially part of "The Plutonium Project" and reached the open literature
somewhat later.
Besides the metabolic studies in animals and in humans referenced earlier, the Rochester group carried out two laborious studies, one
quite large, comparing the toxicity of polonium-210, plutonium-239, and radium-226
in rats.
The doses were given intravenously, were relatively large, and the
endpoint was lethality. Although published later, it is clear that these
experiments established at the time of their performance the fact that plutontum-239 was more toxic even as measured by lethality in a relatively short time
than radium-226 (Fink, 1950).
Because of the isolation of the various projects for security purposes, it is
hard to say that these experiments confirmed the surmises of others based upon
the autoradiographic evidence that since plutonium deposited and remained
nearer to living cells in bone, it might be more toxic than per unit of dose
than its prototype radium-226,
But from the vantage point of our present
knowledge, the facts are quite consistent with such a view.
Full confirmation of the difference in carcinogenicity in bone between plutonium
and radium came in 1953 in a now classic paper by Miriam P. Finkel (1953).
She compared the average probability of the CFl female mouse dying with a
malignant bone tumor as a function of isotope dose.
And she studied not only

Select target paragraph3