radiation dermatitis or anv premalignant or malignant change. No biopsies were taken. Several
women whohad sustained moresevere necklesions
seemed to be showing an increase in pigmented
moles in and around the affected areas. However,
this is not certain, and these moles will be observed carefully in the future for any suspicious
changes. In Table 20 are listed descriptionsof the
residual beta burns seen in 1960. Figure 32 shows
healed beta burnsof the feet 5 years after exposure.
White Blood Counts.
The mean WBC in 1959
showed a further trend upward in both the ex-
posed and unexposed populations, being slightly
lower in the former(see Table 21 and Figure 33).
The 1960 WBC level of the exposed people
showed a considerable drop from a mean level of
9500 in 1959 to 6500 in 1960 as compared with
the trend during the previous two years (no counts
were made on unexposed people in 1960). The ex-
planation for this is not clear. The percentage distribution of the various white “sll levels was not
very different, however, from that of the previous
values.
-
Neutrophils.
The neutrophils in 1959 (Table
21 and Figure 33) showed an increase correspond-
ing to the increase in WBC in both exposed and
unexposed populations, the mean level also being
slightly lower in the exposed. A scattergram
(Figure 34) of the age distribuuon of the counts in
1959 shows a greater tendency for the younger
groups to have lower mean counts in the exposed
LABORATORY EXAMINATIONS
than in the unexposed populations. This was —
Hematological
In Appendices | and 2 are presented summaries
ide’
s
of the mean blood counts of the exposed popula-
noted also in 1958. In 1960 the average of neutrophil counts was 3500 for the exposed group compared with 4800 in 1959. This decrease corresponded with the decrease in the total white count.
Table 21
Mean Leukocyte-and Platelet Counts, 1959 and 1960, by Age and Sex
Rongelap exposed
1959
WBC (x10"),
Neut. (10°),
Lymph. (x 10°),
Mono. (x 1077),
Eosin. (x 107"),
Baso. (1077),
age
age
age
age
age
age
>5
>3
>3
>>5
>5
>3
Plate. (10°*), Malesage5-10
Females
*Standard deviation.
9.52
48>
$0
2.0%
5.0+
0.42
2.3*
19
1.3
1.8
3.3
0.6
32.3210.0
Aulingnae exposed
1960
(60)** 6.51.8 (54)
(60) 3541.5 (54)
(60) 2.74.8 (54)
(60) “0640.2 (54)
(60) 2.7488 (54)
(60) 0.420.114)
( 7)
>10 244+ 9.9 (20)
“>5 27.62210.5 (29)
Unexposed
1959
1960
1959
97224113)
31m21(13)
BTL (IS)
3.22295 (15)
G.0c4.2 (15)
).540.8(15)
7F3H43B UN
3.6+1.6(13)
3041.2 (13)
0620.6 (13)
4.0220.2 (13)
&4+£0.4 (13)
10... 3.1 (123
5.2+ 2.1 (123:
4.1 1.4 (123)
24+ 2.3 (123)
6.04 9.9(123)
0.5 0.8 (123)
26.36.06 4)
26843.7( 9)
-
403.9
**The numbers in parentheses are the numbers of people in the groups.
( 2)
~
34.64£10.8¢
11)
28.0% B4( 54)
81.14 7.2¢ 52)
em
Teg people continued to showresidual skin
damage from beta burns sustained 6 years previously. Most of the residua consisted of very mild
changes, such as varying degrees of pigmentalteration giving a mottled appearance, sometimesaccompanied by a rougheningof the skin (increased
rugosity). Some showed more pronounced changes,
such as atrophy and scarring. None of the more
severe residual lesions showed any gross evidence
of breakdown with the development of chronic
sex. The results of blood counts in the 1959 and
1960 surveys may be summarized as follows.
“} Wa
RESIDUAL BETA BURNS
.4
pointed out, such differences have not been apparent thus far.
tion and various comparison populationssince
exposure in March 1954. In Appendices 3 and +
are listed the individual blood counts for 1959 and
1960. The data are also summarized graphically
in Figures 33, 35, and 38. The blood data have
been classified as in the past according to age and
Meee
those in the unexpased for differences that might
indicate possible premature aging effects. As
Ny
in the exposed popttation will be compared with