Letters Sent to Dr. Herman Schlundt, April 24, 1931

April 24,1931. Dr. Herman Schlundt, University of Missouri, Columbia, Mo. Dear Dr. Schlundt: I had a conference with Dr. Ewing and Dr. Craver one day this week, at which tille we discussed the data which you prepared in connection with the parathormone and viosterol treatment of the four girls. I find that Dr. Fialla has not been very enthusiastic about checking the radium content of these girls by the gamma ray method. I did not discuss this subject with Dr. Fialla, but gathered from Dr. Bwing and Cr. Craver's comments that Dr. Fialla has considerable misgivings rogarding any attempts to estinate the quantity of radium in a living person by the gamma ray method alone, or by the combination of the gamma ray method and expired air method. The foundation for this feeling of uncertainti of his I am not able to offer any explanation. Drs. Ewing and Craver seem to feel quite satisfied with the results as reported by you, and point out that from the curve submitted in your report one might be very easily méslead as to the amount of radium being eliminated - for when these curves are interpolated in terms of radium element climinated per day, month or year the amount is, exceedingly small. I discussed with these gentlemen the subject of publication of this data, and Dr. Ewing expressed himself rather forcefully, that he felt it should be published and that the work should be a joint paper by you and Dr. Craver. Dr. Craver, as characteristic, did not make any particular comment, but I presume that such a procedure would meet with his approval. I see no reason why you should not broach this subject to Dr. Craver at such time as you see fit, referring to the fact that I had advised you that Dr. Ewing suggested a paper was in order. It is possible that you have had some correspondence with Dr. Craver along this same line, or that you will hear from him on the subject in the near future. There is considerable question whether there has been any general improvement in the condition of these girls, and our Committee seems quite convinced that the Parathormone and Viosterol should not be repeated. They, are, however, advising the continuance of the Viosterol, and according to Dr. Flinn's recent comments it is this phase of the treatment which has resulted in the rather striking improvements which he has obtained.