85 should be less than what you would anticipate for 150 r. I would like to know if this perturbs anyone? I have talked to a numberof people that it has perturbed. In other words, the findings observed are not commensurate with the calculated dose. Are they or aren't they? Is it necessary to go to something like this depth dose business to explain this? Do we have to go to something like combined effects to explain it. Or is everybody happy with the findings of 150 or 175 r? Alderson Reporting Company Washington, D. C 10 DR. DUNHAM: Gene, you studied this longer than 11 anybody in the room. 12 as you saw in those animals as you would have guestimated on 13 the 28th of February last, as oming from roughly 150 or 14 175 r total body exposure? 15 CDR. Is there any change in the blood pictur CRONKITE: Oné has to make the assumption on 16 the basis of this data that was: collected that either man 17 behaves differently from what we thought he ought to behave 18 19 20 21 22 23 ARC 24 25 on the basis of large animal experience in the laboratory and with fission spectrums from atomic bombs based on Green- house work, or there is some weird combination of radiation effects that we are not at all aware of to make this difference. It is a very real difference in the time sequence in the platelets in these human beings that occur as has been observed in any laboratory animal. GA