DISCLAIMER

The following is a staff memorandum or other working document 
prepared for the members of the Advisory Committee on Human
Radiation Experiments.  It should not be construed as representing
the final conclusions of fact or interpretation of the issues. 
All staff memoranda are subject to revision based on further 
information and analysis.  For conclusions and recommendations of
the Advisory Committee, readers are advised to consult the Final
Report to be published in 1995.






				MEMORANDUM

TO:       Members of the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation 
	  Experiments

FROM:     Advisory Committee Staff

DATE:     January 10, 1995

RE:       Documentary Update: NEPA Planning /TBI/ Psychological 
	  Testing



     In prior memos,1 [See Briefing Book No. 4 (Tab --); see also
Gil Whittemore's article, also in Briefing Book No. 4 (Tab --), 
titled, A Crystal Ball in the Shadows of Nuremberg and Hiroshima:  
The Ethical Debate Over Human Experimentation to Develop a Nuclear-
Powered Bomber.] Advisory Committee staff described the 1949-50 
discussions regarding proposed human experimentation in connection 
with the development of the nuclear powered airplane (NEPA).  

     We recently acquired and attach for your review some transcripts 
of the actual discussions of the NEPA Advisory Committee.  Following 
its initial deliberations, the NEPA Advisory Committee prepared a 
summary of relevant prior radiation research, also attached.  For 
example, the "Tabulation of Available Data to Radiation Biology" 
includes case by case summaries of 1940's U.S. Total Body Irradiation 
(TBI) experiments (Attachment 1).

     These materials provide a window into discussions of mid-century 
experimental "needs," the human experimental program that was actually 
implemented in the 1950's by Department of Defense (DOD), and some of 
the personalities and institutions involved. 

     The April 3, 1949 (Attachment 2) and May 14, 1949 (Attachment 3) 
NEPA Advisory Committee transcripts provide background to the 1950's 
TBI program.  The transcripts indicate that prior radiation research 
on ill patients was thought to be inadequate, and therefore, research 
had to be conducted on healthy subjects.  Thus, the turn to a 
discussion of the ethics of experimentation may have been precipitated 
by the desire to obtain data from healthy subjects instead of sick 
patients.  As discussed in the November Briefing Book TBI materials 
(Tab No. 8, Tab G), once the decision against NEPA "human 
experimentation" was reached, DOD nonetheless proceeded to study sick 
patients.  The contract justification for Air Force work with M.D. 

				  1

Anderson shows this was done based on the theory that this was not 
"human experimentation" and was thus exempt from the prohibition then 
extent concerning NEPA-related human experimentation.

     The May transcript, shows an interest in obtaining the results of 
relevant prior German experimentation. (p. 45-46)

     The July 22, NEPA Subcommittee transcript (Attachment 4) focuses 
on discussion of "whether or not the radiation hazard represents a 
unique problem psychologically." (p. 8) The transcript shows that there 
was considerable concern that radiation was perceived as unduly risky, 
as well as discussion of the psychology of risk.  The discussion in 
this transcript appears to be a thread that would lead to the 1950's 
psychological testing of troops at bombs tests and TBI patients as a 
part of radiation experimentation.  The discussion of risk perception
has a strikingly contemporary ring.

     Military and civilian scientists were confident in their use
own basic understanding of radiation, yet profoundly troubled and
puzzled by the public's lack of comprehension.

     "We know," said the AEC's Colonel Conney, "just about as much
about it as we do about many other diseases that people take for
granted ...even tuberculosis." (p. 20) "We know" that "it is very
important to stay away fron chronic doses of radiation day after
day, because it is bad...But there is certainly a difference 
between  a man who is working thirty years and a man who is 
getting one acute exposure.  I think this can be well compared 
with other hazards of war." (p. 12)

      Yet, said the Navy's Captain Behrens, there is a "definite
psychological problem associated with radiation which is allied
to, I believe, to the general fear of something that is 
mysterious."  (p. 13) The Navy's Commander Harris was dedicated
to "finding some solution that will begin to meet the obvious,
really tremendous, psychological implications of atomic, and in
a broader sense, A, B, C, [atomic, biological, chemical] warfare."
(p. 14)

      On the other hand, the researchers observed, public 
ignorance mirrored their own thirst for knowledge.  Researchers
"put the emphasis on what we don't know....So the idea is
developed and passed around that we know little or nothing,
whereas actually we have a considerable amount of knowledge."
(p. 21)  The University of California's Dr. Bowman agreed "The 
danagers have been enormously magnified...we have emphasized 
for purpose of getting funds for research how little we know." 
(p. 22).

                                   2

     Civilians, said Dr. Dorcus, a UCLA psychologist, question
"whether the medical group have actually discovered thus far
all the effects of radiation on human beings....that is going
to be one of the most insidious things to combat."  (p. 17-18) 
"[W]hat," Dr. Sells, of the Air Force asked, "is the proper
evaluation of the ethical question as to how to treat the
possible or probable unknown effects?  (p. 18)  While not
answering the question, he observed that "certainly we can
create more anxiety by being scientifically scrupulous than
if we simply treated these matters as we are inclined to treat
other matters in our everyday life." (p. 18)


				  3


                        List of Attachments


Attachment 1:  The NEPA Medical Advisory Panel.  "Tabulation of
               Available Data Relative to Radiation Biology"
               Report No. NEPA 1019-1ER-17.  July 20, 1949.  Oak
               Ridge, Tennessee.  46p.

Attachment 2:  NEPA Advisory Committee on Radiation Tolerance of
               Military Personnel.  Proceedings.  Report No. NEPA
               1011-1ER-16.  April 3, 1949.  Washington, D.C.
               104p.

Attachment 3:  Executive Panel of the NEPA Medical Advisory
               Committee.  Proceedings.  Report No. NEPA 1043-
               1ER-18.  May 14, 1949.  Washington, D.C. 105p.

Attachment 4:  NEPA Medical Advisory Panel Subcommittee No. IX. 
               Proceedings.  Report No. NEPA 1110-1ER-20.  July
               22, 1949.  Washington, D.C.  56p.				   3