Tests at Hanford Illegal? Exec Skeptical in '63 About Using Humans by Angelo Bruscas and Joel Conelly P-I Reporters.

Page 1

Exec skeptical in ’63 about using humans By Angslo Brurcu and Joel Connelly A Hanford manager in 1963 warned in a memo that tests exposing humans to radiation might be illegal. . The memo from C.W. Newton Jr. was hed more than a decade after the tests began and more than 15 years before the practice. of using humans wae ~topped. Newton also told mperiora that it “would be difficult and unwise” to keep records on MY. wrding to the memo obtained recently by the Post-Intelligenm. . Humans were used in a t least 10 tests connected with the Kanford nuclear reservation from 19% to the rnid-l970s, documents show. Some of the tests were used to set standards in the work place. and others had speafic scientific or medical value, offidale have said. Many of the terste detailed in the documents involved M o d workers who had vnrious parts of their bodies exposed to radioactive on inmates and volunteers adid ment officials acknowledge that many of the original records have been last or destroyed. available is necessarily incomplete, in part because of the length of bme that has elapeed mnce the Department of Energy sur par y of the experimenta statas. Many of the original recorda are currently unavailable because they have been lost or destroyed.” ton, dose studies manager, wrote Arthur Keene, at the time Han- “The experiments do not a p pear to have been in compliance with the cnminal codes of the state of Washington, and there ie some question as to whether or substances 88 part of the expcriSee HANFORD. Page A5 not the experiments were conducted in compliance with federal laws.” the memo states. Dr. Sidney Marks, who w s coordinator of human studies for the Atomic Energy Commission in the 19709 and who later compiled a historical list of studies at Hanford, said Newton at the time was “probably bringing up the issue aa something to look at He was probably being very prudent” Federal and state officials eaid the l a w on human tegting in the 19508 and 1960s wae very vague. They also said the issue wm being raised at a time when few fod guidelines for testing edated. menta were done before ”the whole business of institutional. said, any ex ent involving Marks said many d y eXperia Health and Human Subjects Committee, which weigh3 the benefits v w the risks. “Now, no studies with an element of risk are undertaken without review,” said Mark who is now retird Documents obtained by the Energy Department EIS part of a cate that the experiments were conducted for a variety of purDuring the firet decade, “there humans to radioamve substances “for the purpose of establishing safety aiteria for protection of individuals in the work place.” In addition, later Btudies were conducted on humans to determine whether the use of radiation ment in the treatment of &ft to see how people recover h m exposure after given various medlDuring the 19% in particular, human test subjects had parts of their bodies erposed “just to see what would happen,” a spokeanan for Battelle’s Paafic Northwest Laboratories said. Others were done after initial testa on animals For example., 14 humane were erpoeed over a Qnall area of the forearm or abdomen to a water vapor mixed with with xadioactive tritium oxide. These studies tablished the importancx of the skin as a mute of entry. and led to reductione in the allowable conFntration of tritium oxide in air, according to a of The Atomic Energy C o e sion operated the 5 7 ~ squa ~ d e

Page 2

Eastern Washington reservation when the experiments were made. In his memo, Newton indicated that human tests could be ing established formal compliance with federal and state laws.” However, cautioned Newton, to stay within the law,“an official endorsement of such program testing should be specifically stated or received from the Atomic Energy “Such an approval will involve some red tape and delay in obtaining the necessary approval,” Newton said. “It could very well jeopardize continuance of such programa Nevertheless, it seems cation to warrant conducting these programs, then we shouldn’t The letter WBB preceded by a list of guidelines for human experiI“The experiment enjoys the consensus of informed medical opinion as to its legitimacy and is not in violation of statues.” adult person, knowingly and voluntarly coments after full explapreparation by animal experimenof the memo, was reached yesterday in Roseburg, Ore., where he is a real estate broker, but could not recall the memo h m Newton, who has died. experiments on the reservation: I do remember the experiments with prison inmate3,” Keene said. Dr. Uarks also said he had not come a m the memo in hia research, and was not aware of any legal warnings about the experiments at the time. studies were done a t a particular time when particular information m a y have been needed. It’s very hard 15 yeam later to say we .He said he knows of no deaths; aseociated with the experiments and would be surprkd to find out’ there were significant human tests’ done without some records. “If there were experiments that were hushed up, I didn’t hear any mention of them,” Marks said. participated in some of the experiments, added that he had never heard anyone question the legality of the testa “It’s very difficult to put tributed to this report.