55
.T
T
—-
t
T
T
TT
e
50 +
4
45 +
:
4
Lymphocytes.
°
« 357
@ UNEXPOSED
:
“
‘head
a
a 25+
$3
e
20+
eo
.
°°
}
°
{
ISk
10
+
L
0
te)
Ld
20
xX
a
"
40
pt
50
i
60
tion. The 1960 absolute lymphocyte countsalso
|
70
The meanlevel of the lympho-
cyte counts (Table 21 and Figure 35) in 1959
showeda slight increase over the 1958 values. The
meanlevels were about the sametn the exposed
and unexposed populations. A scattergram (Figure
36) of the age distribution of the !ymphocyte
counts in the exposed group for the first time
showed about an equaldistribution in the exposed
population of counts above and below the mean
levels of the unexposed people. The cumulative
percentage distribution curves of the exposed and
unexposed (Figure 37) showed close approxima-
|
40 r
n
w 30 +
33
80
AGE (YR)
Figure 39. Individual platelet counts of exposed males
plotted against age, 1959. Solid line represents mean level
of comparison male population.
showed a decrease corresponding to the WBC decrease, the mean dropping from 4000 in 1959 to
2700 in 1960.
Eosinophils and Monocytes. Eosinophil and
monocyte counts showeda slight increase in 1959
over the 1958 levels and wereslightly greater in
the exposed population. As noted in 1958, a large
percentage of the population had eosinophil
counts >>5% of the total white count (1959, 44% of -
exposed population and 39% of unexposed; 1960,
46% of exposed, no data on unexposed). The levels
2 Pt |
110 4
PLATELETS
0
10
—L
20
—L
30
i
40
4GE
)
59
1
60
of eosinophils and monocytes in 1960 were not
1
70
verydifferent from the 1959 levels. (Basophils are
discussed belowin connection with leukemia. )
Platelets,
lation was about the sameaslast year ( — 9.3% for
the males and — 11.3% for the females). Age dis-
tribution scattergramsfor the individual platelet
(YR)
Figure 40. Individual! platelet counts of exposed females
plotted against age, 1959. Solid line represents mean level
CUMULATIVE PERCENT
of comparison female population.
counts in both males and females of the exposed
population showed more counts below than above
the unexposed mean curve(Figures 39 and 40).
This was also borne out by comparison of the
cumulative percentage distribution curves for the
exposed and unexposed populations: the latter
showed continued displacement to theleft (Figure
41). The significance of the continuedplatelet depression in the exposed population is also indicated by the finding oflevels < 250,000 in 37% of
the exposed group but in only 24% of the unexposed.
Oo SYRS POST EXPOSURE
4 COMPARISON POPULATION|
+
a
{
—L
29
37
45
PLATELETS x107*
=
33
|
6!
Figure 41. Cumulative distribution curve,
Rongelapplatelets, 1959.
N{fean platelet counts in 1959 (Table
21! and Figure 38: were slightly lower than in 1958
in both the exposed and unexposed populations.
The mean deficit in platelets in the exposed popu-
|
69
Erythropoetic Function.
Because of technical
difficulties, the hematocrit levels were not considered reliable for the 1959 survey. Samples containing ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid as an
anticoagulant appeared to have a lower hematocrit than untreated venousor fingerstick blood.