had a body burden of 0.5 Lg or more compared with

CLINICAL, LABORATORY, AND RADIOACTIVITY

3 in 11 persons with lower levels.

OBSERVATIONS

Furthermore, 6

of the 8 persons with total nose counts exceeding

Medical Observations

10,000 cowts per minute were in the former group.
In Fig.

8 the urine radioactivity, the number

of high nose counts,

and the total activity of the

high nose counts per month of exposure of 8 sub-

jects in the Recovery Group are correlated with the
amount of plutonium processed and protective measures used.

There was a sharp rise in plutonium

excretion in 6 subjects

(Nos.

3, 4, 5, 6, 9, and

17); in each case, the rise was preceded by a high
activity of nose swipes, suggesting considerable
exposure to airborne plutonium.

There is no cor-

relation between the level of bedy burden of plutonium as indicated by the urine radioactivity and
total activity in the nese,

but

this

is not surpris-

ing in view of the crudeness of the nose count
technique and the inevitable false positives due .
contamination.

42i)

5[-> el
“Y subject #4

.

1

J

l

1

> 15
Ww

l

1

(2302) (13156)

mee

~“ 5
=
~

4

+ Subject #6

L

4

Maximum permissible level for urine
J

1

[

i

—L

(2804)

Ty

4

Urine counts

_
7

°

ae a ease a a ese I

i
.
.
.
Moximum permissible lavel for urine
1
L
ds
J

T

> 1-H Oe | te 10 —- | 1 246 No further exposure ————»
(75)
(2990) (466)
Urine counts
7
1O;—
=
;

;

;

L

r Subject #7

I

1

r

1

Urine counts

7

Pe co he
|
_
. N 4

5-

Fig.

12

8.

April

i

phat ase, urinalysis,

cult blood.
take n:

and stool examination for

The following roentgenograms were

lateral skull, PA chest, AP pelvis, AP

e knee and elbow, lateral of foot, AP of foot, an
dent al films of right teeth.

Subject #8

Moy

!

June

f

O—sie— | ae—7 ate 15 —Pie~ 1B oie 6 pie 39k NSTie
15— Moximum permissible fevel,
for urine

10 -§.—

—

£

T Subject #9

LL

°

j

a

al,

1

Urine counts

J i

5 —

=

L

<< 3K 4 4 2 9 Nofurther
(2540) (15298) (21898)
exposure

I5—
o ioe
£
£
+

.
Urine counts

L

ee

ee

ee ee

eee

Moximum permissible level for uring’
we
1
i
i
i

YT Subject #17

eee

i

(7090)

Oo 15 Maximum permissible tevel

eee

n

<|4-5e-?

=

ee

L

Urine counts

for urine

sp ~~ So -- Ao oS =

ior

i

L

L

i

i

1

4

i

te

Subject #18
Oo 3-—_—_ | ————_Nofurther exposure
is
No. high nose
swab counts
Urine counts

or

Maximum permissible level for urine

T

> 4 i | oe | ic 14 >e- 8 ic No further exposure ——-——9

i

complete bloo

Be ND

Zsgaxienum permissible level for urine

a
10}-

March

This included inter

count, bleod calcium, phosphorus and alkaline p

>

15h

s-

At first, a very thorough stu

hist ory and physical examination,

T

19. 4c 2 he 7 te [2 ae 16 te No further exposure —---——

=
gq (10

O

L

(H25))

established.

every 2 years was planned.

—

Urine counts

Subject #5

Qo
Cc

was

NN aoximum permissible level for urine

1

lor

_

(financed by the U. S. Atomic Energy Commis

TRS TT TT TTT ae —

|

1

mem

am

Urine counts

> 7 3 | te 2 i 9 2 54— No further exposure ——————>
ist.
(917) {9390)(2418)
_

St

1953, a program for periodic examination of the:

_

ie) -

1

reliable methodology, and one other died,

more

No further exposure ———_——"_

(2759)(774)

:
ip Subject #3

drop ped from the series as a result of the use :

In 1953 and again in 1955, 22 and 25 subje

24 316— 1 te 8 HG

2OHIISS}

toni um workers had measurable body burdens acco

to the assay methods of the time, but 3 have be

l

1

:

l

2F©
™M

i

!

1

i

Amount of Pu handled by group

t =

Moximum permissible level for Urine

Protective Equipment Used
.
Effa ctive
K—— Filter poper respirators ——~———»e_ Positive pressure respirotors ———— Ordinary chemical, hoods ———>«——— Improved hood yentilation ——

July

March

L

1945

4

Aug.

L

Sept,

1

Oct.

J

Nov.

April

May

June

duly

Aug.

Sept

Oct

Nov.

1945

Graphs for 9 subjects showing the urine count, number of high nose counts per month, and total
Th
radioactivity of nasal swipes per month (parenthetical figures) from March to November 1945.
amount of plutonium handled by the Recovery Group and the protective measures used are shown in
the last graph of the second chart,
ab
wat

to

In the early 1950's it was thought that 29

Select target paragraph3