- 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