41
1
make a really good estimate of the severity and the
2
potential danger, but I am confident in my own mind with
3
the counts to have fallen lower, there would have been a
4
{/
serious question.
Alderson Reporting Company
Washington, D. C
5
DR. BUGHER: Yes. It is undoubtedly fortunate
6
they were not cocoannut hunting in the northern islands on
7
that date, too.
8
mentioned was itching and burning of the skin.
3
fishermen complained of that, and also
I notice here one of the earlier things
The Japanese
very maked burning
10
of the eyes, actually beginning while the fallout was still
11
visibly coming down.
12
symptology here?
13
144]
DR. BUGHER:
16
DR. BOND:
Yes.
We discussed that.
Do you want to
comment on it?
et
20
_
chemical?
15
19
How did you interpret that sort of
DR. BOND: You mean in terms o@& whether it was
17
ARC
|
CDR. CONARD:
I think certainly the fact that the
chemical itritating material was on the skin might have
played some part in the initial symptology.
But as far as
21
production of lesions are concerned,
I think it is pretty
22
definite they are radiation lesions, and not chemial in
23
nature.
24
of the eyes, but not nearly so large a number that reported
There were quite a few that did report the burning
general itching of the skin.