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.


                                 Tab I


Staff Memorandum--Abstraction of 
"Markey Report" experiments and
recently 'Identified Dept. of Energy
experiments


                                   STAFF MEMORANDUM

To:       Members of the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation   
          Experiments

From:     Advisory Committee Staff

Date:     July 22,1994

Re:       Abstraction of Markey Report experiments and recently
          identified DOE experiments

     The experiment records form has been modified over the past
two weeks, with particular care paid to the sections on
experiment designation, government application, description of
the subjects, and suspected themes for which each experiment will
be relevant.  In addition, a complete set of directions for
filling out the form has been written for the benefit of the
staff reviewers using the form.  A copy of the revised form is
appended.

     106 experiments have now been abstracted from the Markey
collection1 {1 Due to fragmentary data, we are still identifying 
two experiments identified in the Markey report (category 4.006, 
no. 93 and category 12.903, no. 174).} and 24 of the 48 "new" 
experiments released by the Department of Energy.  (Summaries of 
these "new" experiments were publicly issued by DOE on June 27, 
1994, and can be found in Briefing Book IV, Tab P.) In the course of 
this effort, several facts became clear. They are as follows:

          Existence of classified material: Much of the
documentation that was provided by DOE has been publicly
available -- published journal articles or annual or semi-annual
reports to agencies -- however, actual final reports of specific
experiments were rare.  In addition, there was only fragmentary
internal memoranda documenting potential policy purposes or
grant-review processes.  Experimental protocols, while referred
to in published reports, were lacking.

          Limits of information in the documents: In the majority
of cases, information in the available documents was insufficient
to accurately fill out the fields on subject description,
consent, dates of research, and details of the grant contract
beyond its number.  In 99 of 106 cases, there was no reference to
the manner in which consent was obtained from volunteers.  In
over half of the cases, there was so little information on the
subjects that the reviewers could discern little more than the
sex of the subjects; age, racial mix, military status,
institutional and voluntary status, and pregnancy were almost
never mentioned.  The only descriptive information about the
subjects regularly discernible was whether or not they were
patients.  In at least 51 of the experiments, some of tile
subjects were identified as "patients."

                                1

          The "new" experiments A number of the folders which DOE
gave to the committee describing the recently-identified 48
experiments contained documents relevant to multiple experiments. 
Other folders contained scant information on the experiment they
relate to. In short, the information in these files, like that in
the Markey collection, is incomplete and provides limited basis
for analysis of the subjects or consent procedures.

     The reviewers' effort was most successful in grouping the
experiments into types, and in determining the location of the
research.  A cross check of the five staff members abstracting
the experiments revealed consistent agreement of experiment
grouping.  The reviewers were also successful in identifying the
principal and associate researchers, names and dosages of
isotopes, types and dosages of external radiation, and host
institutions of the researchers.

     The information abstracted is proving adequate to
accomplishing several important tasks. Unique experiment numbers
are being assigned to each experiment using the principal
researchers name and the last date of research or publication. 
This allows us to enter succeeding documents into the preexisting
data-sheet on a particular experiment as future documents are
acquired and reviewed.  Additionally, because we are obtaining
consistent information on experiment types, institutions, and
dates, we are able to begin the task of "experiment mapping".

     What follows is a breakdown of the seven groups in which the
experiments could be categorized according to the form. (No
experiments reviewed fit within the groupings "external--
type unknown" and "therapeutic/diagnostic--type unknown".) The
experiments are identified by location and experiment date, in
chronological order.  The number of research subjects, where
known, is also noted (U=Unknown).


                                  2


105 Experiments Reviewed



Biodistribution (32 total)
U. Rochester ('43) n=5
Oak Ridge ('45) n= 1 8
Berkeley ('45) n= I
Metallurgical Lab of MED ('46) n=
.U. Rochester ('46) n= 16
Los Alamos ('50) n=U
Los Alamos ('50) n=6
Oak Ridge (early '50s) n=55
Oak Ridge (early '50s) n=10
Los Alamos ('51 ) n=3
Oak Ridge ('52) n=30
Mass. General ('53) n=12
Oak Ridge ('55) n=U
U. of Tennessee ('56) n=4
Oak Ridge ('56) n=3
Crocker Labs ('57) n=6
Oak Ridge ('57) n=U
Columbia U. ('58) n=10
Argonne ('59) n=14
Los Alamos ('60) n=2
M.I.T. ('61) n=20
Los Alamos ('61) n=5
Oak Ridge ('62) n=5
Oak Ridge ('63) n=54
BNW ('63) n=5
U. of Rochester ('68) n=3
Batelle Northwest ('70) n=14
Harwell Labs, U.K. ('79) n=21
N.E. Deaconess (-) n=U
Los Alamos (-) n=57
Batelle Northwest (-) n=8
U.   Chicago (-) n=27

External-Total Body (3 total)
U. Chicago ('47) n= 1 4
M.D. Anderson ('51) n=50
U. C. S. F. (-) n=29



External - Partial Body (13 total)
-----  ('42) n=U
Oak Ridge ('45) n=20
U. Chicago ('47) n= 1 5
Los Alamos ('48) n=U
G. E. Richland ('51) n= 1 4
U.S. Army Chem. Lab ('53) n=100
N.Y.U. ('55) n=3
U. Wash. ('63) n=64
Batelle Northwest ('67) n=U
Texas Tech. U. ('63) n=U
Batelle Northwest ('63) n=67
Swedish Hospital ('74) n=U
Fermi Lab ('75) n=100

Tracer (10 total)
Brook Haven ('52) n=15
U.   of Iowa ('53) n=U
U.   Wash. ('55) n=44
Oak Ridge ('55) n=U
Oak Ridge ('55) n=U
U. Chicago (late '50s) n=U
Longhorn ('60) n=U
Los Alamos (-) n=U
U. Wash. (-) n=U
Los Alamos (-) n=12

Intentional Release (2 total)
Air Force S.W.C. ('56) n=U
Oak Ridge ('63) n=17


(continues on next page)

                                        3


Therapeutic/Diagnostic-Experimental
(30 total)
Metallurgical Lab, Chicago ('44) n=7
Argonne ('47) n=700
---- ('47) n=2
U.C.S.F. ('48) n=65
Sloan-Kettering ('48 n=55)
Berkeley ('49) n=172
U. Wash. ('52) n=50
Donner Labs, Seattle ('54) n=76
U.   Wash. ('55) n=80-100
U.   Wash. ('55) n=U
Oak Ridge ('55) n=U
Los Alamos (('55) n=17
Oak Ridge ('56) n=U
U.C.S.F. ('57) n=40
Argonne ('57) n=U
Oak Ridge ('57) n=U
Oak Ridge ('57) n=U
Oak Ridge ('58) n=U
U. Arkansas ('59) n-l00
NRTS ('63) n=U
U.   Wash. ('69) n=65-75
U.   Chicago ('70) n--44
U.C.S.F. ('75) n=94
U. New Mexico ('82) n=230
Lawrence ('84) n=150
U. Wash. ('84) n=U
Los Alamos (-) n=66
Los Alamos (-) n=50
Los Alamos (-) n=5

Therapeutic Diagnostic-Accepted
Techniques (I total)
Harvard ('59) n=U



Experiments of Opportunity (I 5 total)
Mass. General ('50) n=many
Case Western ('51) n=500
U. Puerto Rico ('52) n--U
Oak Ridge ('55) n=2
Oak Ridge ('57) n=8
Beth Israel, Boston (late'50s) n=U
Argonne ("62) n=U
M.I.T. ('64) n=293
Batelle Northwest ('66) n=44
U.   Chicago ('66) n=102
U.   Pittsburgh ('66) n=7
Argonne ('70s) n=400
Rochester (-) n=U
Berkeley (-) n=U
National Lead Co., OH (-) n=284


                                        4