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