Vandiver Brown to Keasbey & Mattison and Raybestos-Manhattan with His Memorandum on the Saranac Report (1948)

A two-page letter of October 22, 1948, from Vandiver Brown, Johns-Manville's secretary, to Ernest Muehleck of Keasbey & Mattison and J. F. D. Rohrbach of Raybestos-Manhattan, sending his four-page memorandum on "Part I" of the Saranac Laboratory report "Asbestos Pneumoconiosis." "You will note in the memorandum I suggest eliminating reference to tumors and also to pneumonia," he writes. He wanted the report limited to the animal experiments because Dr. Arthur Vorwald "will be difficult to deal with" about removing anything in Leroy Gardner's notes, and "if the report is limited to the animal experiments, our right to criticize and suggest changes before publication, or even to forbid publication, is unquestionable."

What it shows

The memorandum quotes the 1936 agreement that the results would be "the property of those who are advancing the required funds." It notes that two paragraphs of the report said "9 out of 11 mice exposed for a year to long-fibre dust showed pulmonary tumors," mostly described as benign, and argues that any reference to "neoplasms" was premature and belonged in a separate study. It also proposes that a later report on human asbestosis be treated as separate and "not subject to the proviso relating to approval prior to publication." Brown wanted a report out quickly "as a counter agent" to the views of Quebec physicians and officials. The sponsors adopted the cancer deletion in November (Brown to Kelly).

In Johns-Manville's chronology

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

Letter from Vandiver Brown to Ernest Muehleck (Keasby & Mattison) and Rohrbach (Raybestos-Manhattan), 10/22/48, entitled "Report on Asbestos Experiments." This is a cover letter for distribution of the draft Saranac Report which Brown sent along with a memorandum of criticism which he drafted. This letter clarifies the reasoning behind some of his suggestions. "You will note in the memorandum I suggest eliminating reference to tumors and also to pneumonia. I also suggest that this report be confined to the results of the experiments with animals and not considered as the first part of a study of the effect of asbestos dust on both animals and human beings. I suggest the segregation because I believe Dr. Vorwald, who has succeeded Dr. Gardner at Saranac, will be difficult to deal with when it comes to suggesting the elimination of anything that he believes is even remotely covered by Dr. Gardner's notes. My [ ] derives from Johns-Manville's experience with him in [ ] with diatomaceous earth experiments which, like the asbestos studies, had not been completed at the time of Dr. Gardner's death. If the report is limited to animal experiments, our right to criticize and suggest changes before publication, or even to forbid publication, is unquestionable. If we permit it to be made part of a report covering more than the animal experiments, our position is not so strong."

A situation is developing with the miners in Quebec that urgently requires that some report based on Dr. Gardner's experiments be made available as a counter-agent to opinions being expressed and conclusions arrived at by Quebec physicians and officials upon the basis of surmise, social ideology and inadequate information. Time therefore is of the essence, and your prompt consideration of the report and your advice as to procedure would be appreciated."

Related documents

• Vandiver Brown and Hobart, Minard & Cooper on New Jersey Dust Disease Bills (1939)