Epigraphs Note on Terminology Acknowledgments Introduction

29. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 1975 DHEW/NIOSH-
76-103. Cited in “Summary Review of Health Effects” EPA/600/8-89/002F,
December 1988, pp. 3–5.
30. Largent spent a career doubting Roholm. Roholm’s findings were not
“authenticated” and “cannot be generally accepted,” Largent insisted. The
Dane had failed to show “a causal relationship” between fluoride and injury,
he told a Kettering roundtable of industry doctors. 1957 Kettering Fluoride
Symposium, Box 63, RAK Collection.
31. H. C. Hodge and F. A. Smith, Fluorine Chemistry, vol. IV, p. 385. Also, “Largent’s
research is often quoted as evidence that bone changes, of the kind encountered
in high fluoride areas and in industry, are never associated with harm
elsewhere in the human organism and therefore have no significance.” G. L.
Waldbott, A Struggle with Titans (New York: Carlton Press, 1965), p. 289.
32. “When one finds, in cases of severe fluorosis of the bone, limitation of motion
of the elbow and the X-ray reveals exostoses of unusual density about the
elbow, one is probably entirely justified in concluding that the deformity
and dysfunction are due to fluorosis, and that disability exists in association
with and because of this disease, whether or not the man is aware of
it, and whether or not he continues to do his job at the plant.” Aluminum
Company of America, Niagara Falls Works Health Survey, File 4, Box 82,
RAK Collection.
33. “An exostoses (a bony outgrowth from the surface of the bone) on one of
the bones of the right forearm and some calcification of the ligaments of
the lower vertebrae were noted” in Ira Templeton’s X-rays, according to Dr
Smyth. He also found “In several instances bony outgrowths which seemed
very much like the bone changes seen by Roholm in the monograph, ‘Fluorine
Intoxication,’” Largent told the Pennsylvania Salt Company. “On the
basis of the data and the conclusions of that book alone, one would accept
the presence of these outgrowths as evidence of the existence of fluorine
intoxication. The conclusions of Dr. Smyth, who used the expression ‘fluorine
intoxication,’ in the interpretation of his findings, would seem to follow
this thesis,” Largent added. Edward Largent, “Report to the Pennsylvania
Salt Company,” May 8, 1948, File 13, Box 38, RAK Collection.
34. Bovard to Kehoe, February 28, 1946. Also, Bovard X-ray interpretation, February
19, 1946, File 13, Box 38, RAK Collection.
35. J. Russell Davey, M.D., to Pennsylvania Salt Co., In Re: Ira Templeton. January
31, 1947, File 13, Box 38, RAK Collection.
36. S. C. Ogburn Jr., manager, Research and Development Department, Pennsylvania
Salt Company, to Kehoe, February 10, 1947, File 13, Box 38, RAK
Collection.
37. Kehoe to S. C. Ogburn Jr., February 12, 1947, File 13, Box 38, RAK Collection.
38. “Final Report of the Results of Investigations Relating to Fluoride Metabolism
Conducted Under the Sponsorship of the Pennsylvania Salt Company.”
Unpublished Reports vol. 24-a, Kettering Laboratory, p. 13, RAK
Collection.