Dr. Kenneth W. Smith to O. A. Battista of Food Machinery Corporation on Asbestos Health Hazards (1966)

A two-page letter of August 18, 1966, from Dr. Kenneth W. Smith, J-M's medical director, to O. A. Battista at the Food Machinery Corporation's research center in Princeton, New Jersey, who had asked J-M's H. G. Donovan about health hazards in handling asbestos fiber. Smith granted that long, continued inhalation of the fiber may cause lung changes, but wrote that J-M's mines and mills had developed no new cases of asbestosis for many years and that "with simple control measures it is possible to eliminate a potential hazard." He described the 5 million particles per cubic foot limit, approved respirators and yearly examinations and chest X-rays of J-M employees.

What it shows

The second half of the letter repeats, nearly word for word, Smith's June 1965 memo dismissing the insulator cancer study (Smith to Hendry, 1965), now sent to an outside company: the men were "asbestos workers" only by union membership, and Smith did not believe there was "a serious health hazard associated with the use of asbestos, particularly the chrysotile variety." That same summer J-M's public health task force noted it had never seen written reports backing the claim of low cancer rates among J-M workers (Solon to Smith, June 1966).

In Johns-Manville's chronology

Johns-Manville's own chronology of what the company knew describes this document as follows:

Letter to O.A. Battista, Food Machinery Corporation, from Kenneth W. Smith, 8/18/66 in response to an inquiry which had initially been made to H.G. Donovan. Smith acknowledges a potential risk arising from continued inhalation of asbestos fiber but states "however, in our mines and mills where approximately 2,000 people are producing in excess of 500,000 tons of asbestos annually, we have developed no new cases of asbestos for many years. While I do not have the exact figures on the incidence of asbestos in this country, I know that there are relatively few cases. With simple control measures it is possible to eliminate a potential hazard. . . To prove that we have no deleterious exposures in the working area, we carry out physical examinations and chest x-rays on our employees each year. This program has shown us that with proper control in the working area, we do not develop cases of asbestosis."

Smith refers to recent research and attendant publicity, (presumably Selikoff), and states: "We do not believe that the so-called facts which were reported are basically correct. In the first place, the men examined were called 'asbestos workers' because they belonged to the Asbestos Workers Union. It was inferred that all of these men were exposed to asbestos fiber. We know that this is not correct. The report ignored the fact that the men examined were exposed to many other potentially toxic materials and simply blamed everything on the asbestos fiber. I personally do not believe that there is a serious health hazard associated with the use of asbestos, particularly the chrysotile variety. Having worked in most phases of the asbestos industry for nearly a quarter of a century, I have seen no indication that an extensive health hazard exists. We have observed the health of more than 2,000 employees in our large asbestos mine and mill in Quebec during this period where we are producing nearly 3/4 million tons of fiber per year. It is my firm belief that when reasonable working conditions are maintained and materials are handled properly, no health problems will exist."