why the test either was administered to everyone irradiated ‘great statistical singificance) or even administered at all (no statistical ¢i,i.ficance). To all intents and purposes, it appears that this incident was just what it was described to be: "Eight irradiated people . . . were used ina study." Thyroid Studies Concerning the developments of thyroid nodules in the people exposed (20 cases, four with malignant lesions), the Committee is concerned with three particular areas or aspects. One, it finds it difficult to believe that original calculations involving this gland did not take into account the smaller gland of the children. Many times, especially in connection with the deposition of radionuclides such as sr?? mention is made that the retention for children may differ from that estimated for adults because of the natural factor of growth. How was it that the many experts who worked in this field for so many years never accounted for this factor until it was blatantly apparent due to the development of nodules in 1963 and 1964. True, the Committee is aware that doctors and scientists, despite the rigors of their high callings, are human beings and thus subject to errors; however the Committee finds it most disconcerting that such a simple fact was overlooked for so long and only reconsidered when the doctors were faced with a development that was unexpected in the light of earlier assumptions. By the same token, the Committee finds it also difficult to believe that inconsistent findings of Protein Bound Iodine were never well looked into. Mention was made of the possibility of glass receptacles being unhygenic, or the findings were attributed to some unknown influence. point of view, At least from a hindsig' - it would appear that considering the near tolerance doses of iodine and considering the later negative findings, someone should have investigated with more detail the reasons for such positive findings which should have appeared to [OPH Tob “te