Abstract
States "Dr. Jenkins gave a brief presentation of the historical evolution of the 210Po issue." Lists key points as the following: 1) January, 1964 Radford paper, published in Science, indicates "210Po, an alpha emitter, is a natural contaminant of tobacco and is present in cigarette smoke." 2) Unpublished results from R&D verified polonium levels in tobacco and cigarette smoke by 1967-68. 3) The medical profession stated polonium was rapidly cleared from the respiratory tract. 4) May, 1974 Martell paper, published in Nature, claims insoluble particles of high lead radioactivity is produced during smoking, and speculatively results in "high local alpha irradiation (hot spots) being delivered to the bronchial epithelium and resulting in bronchial cancer in smokers." 5) Martell paper, published in 1975 American Scientist, attributes "most of man's ills to alpha irradiation" and references "the problems associated with cigarette smoking as forewarning the dangers of a nuclear energy economy." 6) 1975 paper presentation by Radford and Martell in Scotland "dealt with the residence time of insoluble particles in the lung and permitted a calculation of the dose of alpha irradiation delivered to the smoker." 7) Subsequent unpublished research at R&D indicates "some major discrepencies in the quantitative aspects of the [Martell's] data" which "would have reduced their doses estimates by an order of magnitude." 8) Discussion ensued on research with hydroponically grown tobacco and lead. Discusses current activity on polonium-210 research citing four recently published papers. Indicates Mr. Holtzman took great interest in R&D manuscript and is being supplied with additional research materials in order to assess "potential problems of low level radiation in all PM operations..." States "The need for monitoring ..." Opines success of meeting contingent upon "reconsideration of the publication of R&D manuscript."
Page 1: 1000016574
Log in for more options!
To:
From:
Subject:
PHILIP MORRIIS U.
INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE
Dr. R. B. Se!igman Oate: November 14, 11980
J. L. Charles
Meeting With Mr. Al)ex Hoitzman - ~*°Polonium Briefing - November II, 1980
Present were: M.r. Hol)tzman, Dr. Robert Jenkins, Mr. Roger Comes and iMr.
Charles
Dr. Jenkins gave a brief presentation of the historical evolution
of the ~)°Po.issue. Key points were:
I. In January 1964, E. P. Radfo.rd!, Jr. published a paper in Science
entitlled "Polionium-21:O: A VolatiTe Radioelement in Cigarettes"
which indicated 2)°Po, an ~ emitter, is a natural contaminant
of tobacco and is present in, cigarette smoke.
2. By 1967-68 the levels of 2Z°Po in tobacco and cigarette smoke
were verified at R&D. The results were not published.
3¸,
The medical profession determined that zZ'°Po was cleared rapidly
from the tracheobronchial tree and l!ung and interest in the
subject waned .... "
no
In May 1!974, E. A. Martell published a. paper in Nature which
claimed that ailrborne 21°Pb is deposited on the sticky tobacco
trichomes and that insoluble particles of high 2z°Pb radio-
activity are produced during smokingiand transfer into mainstream
cigarette smoke. Martell speculated! that disposition of
insoluble particles containing ~)°Pb (t½=22y) in the bronchi
of smokers and subsequent ingrowth of 2Z°Po resulted in high
local ~ irradiatiion (hot spots)beingi delivered to the
bronchial epiithelliumand resulting in bronchial cancer in
smokers.
Be
In 1975, Martell published a paper in American Scientistwhich
contained further speculation on insoldble radioactive smoke
particles, mechanism of tumor production, organ, distribution,
alpha activity and atheroscherosis, chemical factors and
effects on health. This paper was remarkable in that Martell
was able to attribute most of man's ills to: alpha irradiation
and referenced the problems associated wilth cigarette smoking
as forewarning the dangers of a nuclear energy economy.
In 1975, Radford and Martell presented a pa.per in Scotland
which dealt with the residence time of insoluble particlles in
the lung and permitted a calculation, of the dose of ~
irradiation~ delivered to the smoker.
Page 2: 1000016575
Log in for more options!
-2-
7. Subsequent research at R&D showed that while Martel!Is' data
were qualiitatively correct there were some major discrepencies
in the quantitativ'e aspects of the data. A key assumption of
the paper given in: Scotland was that initially the ratio of
21°Po to ~°Pb was zero, that i:s to say the radioactivity in •
the insoluble particles was all due to ~°Pb and ~°Po ingrowth
had not occured. Results at R&D have indicated that 21°Pb and
~°Po are in secular equilibrium and in fact the ~°Po/~°Pb
is one (1). This would have reduced their dose estimates by
an order of magnitude. This research was put into manuscript
form in 1978 for possible publication to refute Martell.'s
erroneous data. It was decided not to publish the paper at
that time.. ~L~
8. Research with hydroponically grown tobacco, and ~1°'Pb in
collaboration with Dr. T. C. Tso, the inhalation dosimetry
study at the Tobacco and Health Research In~stitute in Kentucky,
washed versus unwashed tobacco, and glanded versus "glandlless"
tobacco was also discussed. -
With regard to current activity on ~1°Po there were four recent
papers on this issue by Robertson and Rogers fromAustralia (I1980),
Beverly Cohen et al. from NYU! Medical Center (1980, 1979) and an
ORNL publication by Travis et all. (1978) were discussed briiefly.
The key poiint here is that interest is continuing on the 2~°Po issue.
In addition we have information (R. Jenkins) that Martell is about to
publish another paper and Radford is ready to pub.lish two more papers
on this subject. In January 1980, the Nuclear Power advertisement in
the New York Times and in February 1980 the Newscript report on Martell
and radioactive cigarettes plus the Mother Jones reference to Three Mile
Marlboro, (December 1.980) indicate continued interest appearing in the
lay press.
Mr. Holtzman expressed a great deal of interest in all of the above
and took a copy of the R&D manuscript with him. I think it is fair to
say that a reconsideration of the merits of publishing this work is in
order and' Mr. Holtzman so allowedi. Mr. Comes has sent Mr. Holtzman
copies of recent papers on the 2~°Po issue plus additionali information
with regard to assessment of potential problems of low level radiation
in all PM operations from plant effluents, process concentration
possibilities and building materials and soil associated with new
construction. The need for monitoring low level radiation against a
background of Chinese nuclear testing, eruption of Mt. St. Helens and
recent EPA guidelines were also discussed.
I believe the meeting was worthwhile and will have been successful
if a reconsideration of the publication of R&D manuscript is forthcoming.
JLC/Imh
CC:
T. S. Osdene
Mr. Holtzman
R. W.. Jenkins
R. A. Comes
E. B. Sanders
