Ask the Scholar
Page 3 of 3
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
June 4, 1925.
Mr. C. H. Granger,
c/o Waterbury Clock Company,
Waterbury,
Conn.
My dear ltr. Granger:
I have your letter of June 1 and will give you below as
nearly as I can the information for which you ask.
One of our former operators in the Application Department
at Orange has brought a suit against us for damages to cover injury
which is alleged to have been caused by employment in our factory.
The case is apparently unique and is coming up in a State court because
the State Compensation Board denied compensation and consequently the
insurance company, the American Mutual of Boston, refuses compensation.
Her condition is a serious jaw necrosis and very stubborn.
It developed following the extraction of a tooth or teeth about a year
ago and has not yet, I understand, been brought under control.
Serious jaw necrosis is not a very common condition although
minor necrosis is not at all rare. I have been told that it has been
brought about by just the use of peroxide of hydrogen after tooth
extraction.
Miss Carlough, the plaintiff, in this action, developed
necrosis soon after leaving our employ. Shortly before that, we heard
of another former operator who had developed a similar condition, but
she had not worked for us for about four years. We were also told that
two others who had left us about two years earlier had a similar complaint.
Radium luminous material, as you undoubtedly lonow, is made of
a specially prepared zinc sulphide which is insoluble except in hot acid.
It contains no phosphorus or other ingredients Imom to be poisonous.
Animal tests that we have had made using Undark in much stronger doses than
could be absorbed by any operators, have not produced jaw necrosis or any
similar condition. Radium taken internally is known to finally locate in
the bones, particularly the long bones, and work out of animals or humans
slowly. We are having additional work done with animals right now, but
I understand there has been no apparent change in guinea pigs that have
had Undark applied to their gums for several weeks. Later these animals
will be sacrificed and conclusions dram.
Radium and other radioactive elements are extensively used
internally in Europe and in some measure in this country in the treatment
of various conditions. They are administered usually by intravenous
(Contimued)
Waterbury Clock Co.
- 2 -
injection or intromiscular injection and sometimes through the mouth.
The clinical effect is greatest if administered intravenously. This
therapy has been known for a good many years and there are records of
patients who have received appreciable doses quite frequently over
long periods of time. I an told that there is no record of any form
of necrosis having resulted from this treatment, and that while not
effective in all cases, it has apperently had no ill effects. It is
avoided in tubercular and other conditions where stimulation is
undesirable.
The application of luminous materials has been carried on
commercially since 1912 or 1913 in Europe and since a little later than
that in this country. It has reached very large proportions in the
world.
There are a good many plants here and a still larger mumber
in Switzerland and Germany.
Investigation of the medical literature
of all countries has brought to light no report of a similar condition
to the one that has occurred in Orange.
If we are confronted with a
new occupational disease, it seems almost inconceivable that it should
be limited to our operators, and while of course no one can say that
similar cases have not occurred elsewhere, it seems highly improbable
that these should not have caused comment and investigation and
publication which is the medical procedure.
The properties of sinc are so well-lanow that it is safe to
set it aside as a cause. Radium, on the other hand, is a relatively
new element with only twenty years experience behind it. If luminous
material can be injurious, it would in all probability be due to its Radium
constituent. Dr. Hoffman, who made the address referred to in the
newspaper clipping that you sent, visited our Plant in March and our
discussion at that time left me with the impression that he was not very
well informed. While of course I cannot be sure, it is my belief that
he is retained by the other side in the present case, and that they are
hopeful that publicity can be made a factor.
We are taking particular pains to see that rules and
regulations covering hygiene are strictly carried out in our Plant and
particularly that the operators do not place the brushes in their mouths.
There has always been a rule against moistening brushes or shaping the
brushes with the lips in order to avoid contemination of the luminous
material and adhesives, which as you know it is exceedingly important to
have pure.
Dr. Prederick Flinn of Columbia University who is making
some examinations for us has expressed a desire to visit application
departments in other plants in order to determine for himself whether or not
general health condition of operators is the same in other plants as in ours.
He is a man of great experience and of the highest order. It would help
us if you would allow him to visit your department, and I hope that you
will be willing to have him.
If there are any points that I have left uncovered, please let
me know.
Cordially,
ARoeder-HM
President.
Page data
- Page
- 3
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- document
- Media ID
- 29a6ba204b318f56
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 75719367
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "75719367",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75719367",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Letters Sent to C.H. Granger, June 4, 1925",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75719367",
"collections": [
"Safety Light Collection",
"Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0000340_Page_1.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0000340_Page_1.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0000340_Page_1.jpg",
"imageCount": 3,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "75719367",
"label": "Letters Sent to C.H. Granger, June 4, 1925",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75719367"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "75719367",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75719367",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Letters Sent to C.H. Granger, June 4, 1925",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75719367",
"collections": [
"Safety Light Collection",
"Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0000340_Page_1.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0000340_Page_1.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0000340_Page_1.jpg",
"imageCount": 3,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75719367",
"naId": 75719367,
"levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 3,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "document",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0000340.pdf",
"mediaId": "29a6ba204b318f56",
"ocrText": "June 4, 1925.\nMr. C. H. Granger,\nc/o Waterbury Clock Company,\nWaterbury,\nConn.\nMy dear ltr. Granger:\nI have your letter of June 1 and will give you below as\nnearly as I can the information for which you ask.\nOne of our former operators in the Application Department\nat Orange has brought a suit against us for damages to cover injury\nwhich is alleged to have been caused by employment in our factory.\nThe case is apparently unique and is coming up in a State court because\nthe State Compensation Board denied compensation and consequently the\ninsurance company, the American Mutual of Boston, refuses compensation.\nHer condition is a serious jaw necrosis and very stubborn.\nIt developed following the extraction of a tooth or teeth about a year\nago and has not yet, I understand, been brought under control.\nSerious jaw necrosis is not a very common condition although\nminor necrosis is not at all rare. I have been told that it has been\nbrought about by just the use of peroxide of hydrogen after tooth\nextraction.\nMiss Carlough, the plaintiff, in this action, developed\nnecrosis soon after leaving our employ. Shortly before that, we heard\nof another former operator who had developed a similar condition, but\nshe had not worked for us for about four years. We were also told that\ntwo others who had left us about two years earlier had a similar complaint.\nRadium luminous material, as you undoubtedly lonow, is made of\na specially prepared zinc sulphide which is insoluble except in hot acid.\nIt contains no phosphorus or other ingredients Imom to be poisonous.\nAnimal tests that we have had made using Undark in much stronger doses than\ncould be absorbed by any operators, have not produced jaw necrosis or any\nsimilar condition. Radium taken internally is known to finally locate in\nthe bones, particularly the long bones, and work out of animals or humans\nslowly. We are having additional work done with animals right now, but\nI understand there has been no apparent change in guinea pigs that have\nhad Undark applied to their gums for several weeks. Later these animals\nwill be sacrificed and conclusions dram.\nRadium and other radioactive elements are extensively used\ninternally in Europe and in some measure in this country in the treatment\nof various conditions. They are administered usually by intravenous\n(Contimued)\nWaterbury Clock Co.\n- 2 -\ninjection or intromiscular injection and sometimes through the mouth.\nThe clinical effect is greatest if administered intravenously. This\ntherapy has been known for a good many years and there are records of\npatients who have received appreciable doses quite frequently over\nlong periods of time. I an told that there is no record of any form\nof necrosis having resulted from this treatment, and that while not\neffective in all cases, it has apperently had no ill effects. It is\navoided in tubercular and other conditions where stimulation is\nundesirable.\nThe application of luminous materials has been carried on\ncommercially since 1912 or 1913 in Europe and since a little later than\nthat in this country. It has reached very large proportions in the\nworld.\nThere are a good many plants here and a still larger mumber\nin Switzerland and Germany.\nInvestigation of the medical literature\nof all countries has brought to light no report of a similar condition\nto the one that has occurred in Orange.\nIf we are confronted with a\nnew occupational disease, it seems almost inconceivable that it should\nbe limited to our operators, and while of course no one can say that\nsimilar cases have not occurred elsewhere, it seems highly improbable\nthat these should not have caused comment and investigation and\npublication which is the medical procedure.\nThe properties of sinc are so well-lanow that it is safe to\nset it aside as a cause. Radium, on the other hand, is a relatively\nnew element with only twenty years experience behind it. If luminous\nmaterial can be injurious, it would in all probability be due to its Radium\nconstituent. Dr. Hoffman, who made the address referred to in the\nnewspaper clipping that you sent, visited our Plant in March and our\ndiscussion at that time left me with the impression that he was not very\nwell informed. While of course I cannot be sure, it is my belief that\nhe is retained by the other side in the present case, and that they are\nhopeful that publicity can be made a factor.\nWe are taking particular pains to see that rules and\nregulations covering hygiene are strictly carried out in our Plant and\nparticularly that the operators do not place the brushes in their mouths.\nThere has always been a rule against moistening brushes or shaping the\nbrushes with the lips in order to avoid contemination of the luminous\nmaterial and adhesives, which as you know it is exceedingly important to\nhave pure.\nDr. Prederick Flinn of Columbia University who is making\nsome examinations for us has expressed a desire to visit application\ndepartments in other plants in order to determine for himself whether or not\ngeneral health condition of operators is the same in other plants as in ours.\nHe is a man of great experience and of the highest order. It would help\nus if you would allow him to visit your department, and I hope that you\nwill be willing to have him.\nIf there are any points that I have left uncovered, please let\nme know.\nCordially,\nARoeder-HM\nPresident."
}