Ask the Scholar

Page 2 of 4
I can add historical knowledge about this page.

Page image

Page 2

OCR

2 radium in the dust he collected from the working room in Orange, and competent dentists in Boston did not agree with the readings made in Nevark on the same facts which he did not publish in his printed article, although these should have appeared in a scientific statement of the case. Purthermore, practically all of his references referred to blood changes, and not to bone changes. Mt feelings fluctuated, as I could not find any evidence of trouble outside the Orange plant, and I folt that there must have been some peculiar condition in that plant that did not exist in others. In November, 1925 I heard Dr. Martland read a paper before the Pathological Society and wrote Mr. Reeder that if any jury had heard this paper, there souldn't be any doubt as to the verdict, and suggested that he compromise the case then in docket if possible. I felt that Dr. . Martland vas honest in his remarks, al though not accurate in all cases. I then decided to write to Dr. Drinker for a copy of his blood findings on the girls in the Orange plant and, still under the influence of Martland's paper, used the remark which seeme to have vorried you and caused them some satisfaction. This remark simply meant that after hearing Martland's paper my opinion was upset and I e Couldn't holp but feel that radium might be partially to blame for the conditions. As my investigation proceeded I was faced with the facts enumerated in my first paper and while I argued against them in my own mind, there was no way that I could explain the orange cases except by infection. The suggestion as to the mode of in gress of the radium into the jaw bone did not tally with my experi- ments. Finally, for lack of money to carry on the research, I wound up my work and published my findings. After my paper had been ac- cepted but before it was published, the case in Taterbury was sent as me as a suspicious case and I again began to waver in my hypothesis. This would never have been called a radium case if I had not so naned it. The blood picture vas not indicative of radium exposure, if we are to believe the literature. But I called both this and the second case in Connecticut radium cases for the folloving reasons: 1. Radium exposure 2. Radium present in the body 3. Symptoms in jaw same as described by Martland and similar to Mias Fryer! Jaw I discussed this case before the New York Acadeny of Medicine at their request, and stated my beliof that radium must have been a factor in the disease. Having found radium in each case that had developed this pathologic condition, I felt it was a orine -- almost a sacri- lege - to dig up Miss Maggie's body as was done. Outside of some possible clue as to whether or not she had syphilis, there was no

Page data

Page
2
Source index
0
Type
photo
Media ID
706322cf90fa6ff5
Size
unknown

Document data

ID
75722371
Core
doc
Type
document
DTO data
{
    "id": "75722371",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75722371",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Letters Received to Edwin Smith [Edwin F. Smith], February 29, 1928",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75722371",
    "collections": [
        "Safety Light Collection",
        "Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001217_Page_1.jpg",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001217_Page_1.jpg",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001217_Page_1.jpg",
    "imageCount": 4,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

Context sent to Scholar

Document identity
{
    "localId": "75722371",
    "label": "Letters Received to Edwin Smith [Edwin F. Smith], February 29, 1928",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75722371"
}
Document source metadata
{
    "id": "75722371",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75722371",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Letters Received to Edwin Smith [Edwin F. Smith], February 29, 1928",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75722371",
    "collections": [
        "Safety Light Collection",
        "Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001217_Page_1.jpg",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001217_Page_1.jpg",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001217_Page_1.jpg",
    "imageCount": 4,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75722371",
    "naId": 75722371,
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
    "seq": 2,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "photo",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001217_Page_2.jpg",
    "mediaId": "706322cf90fa6ff5",
    "ocrText": "2\nradium in the dust he collected from the working room in Orange,\nand competent dentists in Boston did not agree with the readings\nmade in Nevark on the same facts which he did not publish\nin his printed article, although these should have appeared in a\nscientific statement of the case. Purthermore, practically all\nof his references referred to blood changes, and not to bone changes.\nMt feelings fluctuated, as I could not find any evidence of trouble\noutside the Orange plant, and I folt that there must have been some\npeculiar condition in that plant that did not exist in others.\nIn November, 1925 I heard Dr. Martland read a paper before the\nPathological Society and wrote Mr. Reeder that if any jury had heard this\npaper, there souldn't be any doubt as to the verdict, and suggested\nthat he compromise the case then in docket if possible. I felt that\nDr. . Martland vas honest in his remarks, al though not accurate in all\ncases.\nI then decided to write to Dr. Drinker for a copy of his\nblood findings on the girls in the Orange plant and, still under the\ninfluence of Martland's paper, used the remark which seeme to have\nvorried you and caused them some satisfaction. This remark simply\nmeant that after hearing Martland's paper my opinion was upset and\nI e Couldn't holp but feel that radium might be partially to blame\nfor the conditions. As my investigation proceeded I was faced with\nthe facts enumerated in my first paper and while I argued against\nthem in my own mind, there was no way that I could explain the orange\ncases except by infection. The suggestion as to the mode of in\ngress of the radium into the jaw bone did not tally with my experi-\nments. Finally, for lack of money to carry on the research, I wound\nup my work and published my findings. After my paper had been ac-\ncepted but before it was published, the case in Taterbury was sent\nas me as a suspicious case and I again began to waver in my hypothesis.\nThis would never have been called a radium case if I had not so naned\nit. The blood picture vas not indicative of radium exposure, if we are\nto believe the literature. But I called both this and the second case\nin Connecticut radium cases for the folloving reasons:\n1. Radium exposure\n2. Radium present in the body\n3. Symptoms in jaw same as described by Martland and similar\nto Mias Fryer! Jaw\nI discussed this case before the New York Acadeny of\nMedicine at their request, and stated my beliof that radium must have\nbeen a factor in the disease.\nHaving found radium in each case that had developed\nthis pathologic condition, I felt it was a orine -- almost a sacri-\nlege - to dig up Miss Maggie's body as was done. Outside of some\npossible clue as to whether or not she had syphilis, there was no"
}