- B3 ‘ PRIVACY ACT MATERIAL REMOVED ‘ samples collected subsequent to January 20 gave negative The only thing that this demonstrates is that no results. Even following the indetectable level of Pu-239 was found. jection of large volumes of Pu-239 solution into the skin and muscle of animals, the Pu-239 is slowly absorbed and appreciable Morefractions, up to 70%, remain at the site of injection. over, of the quantity absorbed only a small fraction appears in the urine or feces (see page 3, Exhibit 3 and Exhibit 4). In case we are concerned with only a very small volume of solution and hence we should not be surprised if we obtain negative results in an individual urine or feces sample. (See also Exhibit 5) The physical examination performed by Dr. Roy E. Albert on January 23, 1963, has no relevance... One woulc expect no overt signs of radiation injury at this early date from the small quantity of Pu-239 which is at issue here. We are concerned here with the long term effects, The medical history of appears to be accurate, however, not the acute effects. as recorced by Dr. Wald he omitted the conclusions J oF of the Patholocy Report of the Hospital for Suscial Surcery wherein the unanimous opinion of the pathologists was stated to be that this lesion was a synovial sarcoma. The negative findings in the feces and urine in April of 1970 are of no more relevance than the similar findines in the January 1963 samples. The whole body counter has a detection limit of 0.3 u Ci of Pu-239. At issue here are quantities below 0.06 u Ci and, _-— hence, well below the Cetectable There are three reasons for setting aside findings in the initial tissue removed from limit. the negative . First, since the pathologist report indicated "no evidence of atypical or malignant changes," it 1s quite possible that this mass was unrelated to the sarcoma. Recall here that th2 histolocy cf the small nodule in Exhibit 2 showed severe changes that resembled precancerous changes. Third, the site of contamination was not necessarily removed with the mass or it could have trimmed from the mass prior to production of the paraffin blocks and slides. Consider here that the nodule in Exhibit 2 was only 1/10 of a millineter in diameter. Since eventually developed an infiltrating soft tissue sarcoma, and this original tissuc removed showed no atyvical change, there is no besis for PRIVACY ACT MATERIAL REMOVED