Ask the Scholar
Page 2 of 3
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
-2-
time it was rendered. This appears to me to be an entirely
different question from agreement with it later with many more
known facts at hand than you had at that time. I can find the
following reasons why you might have been justified in disagreeing
with his report: First, you had had several years' experience
with several hundred employees engaged in hendling radium before
any unfavorable effects on them were observed. Second, the
number of cases which Dr. Drinker found unusual was a rather small
fraction of your total employees and since you were not at that
time greatly impressed with the unusual nature of their affliction,
you did not believe that they were so outstanding or that you had
any special health problem in your plant. This state of mind on
your part, together with your doubt of the dust factor in Dr.
Drinker's report, would naturally prejudice you against it to a
certain extent and you would therefore not rush into an acceptance
of his recommendations.
I do not know that there is anything in the foregoing
that will give you anything more than some mental comfort or
moral support. I do not know what the legal aspects of such a
situation would be but I have been able to make that much reconcila-
tion between your stand and Dr. Drinker's report.
I expect to be in New York on Tuesday or Wednesday,
April 24th - 25th. If any further discussion of these matters would
assist you, I could arrenge to see you at that time.
With best regards,
Sincerely yours,
s. C. find
S. 0. Lind,
Director.
SCL/CS
Page data
- Page
- 2
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- photo
- Media ID
- b63a7d0eb499049e
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 75722442
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "75722442",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75722442",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Letters Received to H.H. Barker, March 31, 1928",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75722442",
"collections": [
"Safety Light Collection",
"Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001240_Page_1.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001240_Page_1.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001240_Page_1.jpg",
"imageCount": 3,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "75722442",
"label": "Letters Received to H.H. Barker, March 31, 1928",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75722442"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "75722442",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75722442",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Letters Received to H.H. Barker, March 31, 1928",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75722442",
"collections": [
"Safety Light Collection",
"Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001240_Page_1.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001240_Page_1.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001240_Page_1.jpg",
"imageCount": 3,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75722442",
"naId": 75722442,
"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_0001240_Page_2.jpg",
"mediaId": "b63a7d0eb499049e",
"ocrText": "-2-\ntime it was rendered. This appears to me to be an entirely\ndifferent question from agreement with it later with many more\nknown facts at hand than you had at that time. I can find the\nfollowing reasons why you might have been justified in disagreeing\nwith his report: First, you had had several years' experience\nwith several hundred employees engaged in hendling radium before\nany unfavorable effects on them were observed. Second, the\nnumber of cases which Dr. Drinker found unusual was a rather small\nfraction of your total employees and since you were not at that\ntime greatly impressed with the unusual nature of their affliction,\nyou did not believe that they were so outstanding or that you had\nany special health problem in your plant. This state of mind on\nyour part, together with your doubt of the dust factor in Dr.\nDrinker's report, would naturally prejudice you against it to a\ncertain extent and you would therefore not rush into an acceptance\nof his recommendations.\nI do not know that there is anything in the foregoing\nthat will give you anything more than some mental comfort or\nmoral support. I do not know what the legal aspects of such a\nsituation would be but I have been able to make that much reconcila-\ntion between your stand and Dr. Drinker's report.\nI expect to be in New York on Tuesday or Wednesday,\nApril 24th - 25th. If any further discussion of these matters would\nassist you, I could arrenge to see you at that time.\nWith best regards,\nSincerely yours,\ns. C. find\nS. 0. Lind,\nDirector.\nSCL/CS"
}