DOE Shield DOE Openness: Human Radiation Experiments: Roadmap to the Project
Oral Histories
Roadmap to the Project
HomeRoadmapWhat's NewMultimediaRelated SitesFeedback
Oral Histories

Medical Physicist Kathering L. Lathrop and Physician Paul V. Harper


Foreword

Short Biographies

Lathrop's Education and Early Career (Manhattan Project, 1945-46)

Lathrop's Work at Argonne National Laboratory (1947-54)

Lathrop's Work as a Chemist at the Argonne Cancer Research Hospital (Beginning in 1954)

Harper's Education and Early Career (1940s to Early '50s)

Harper's Thoughts on the Mixture of Medicine and Science (Late '40s and '50s)

Lathrop's Early Cancer Therapy Research

Harper's Early Determinations of Radiation Doses

Development of Iodine-125 Production Methods and the AEC Review Process

Discussion of Radiation Research Standards

Lathrop and Harper Collaborative Research (1965-67)

Thallium Research

Antifibrinogen Research

Various Radioactive Isotope Research by Lathrop and Harper

Argonne Cancer Research Hospital History (Early '70s)

Research on Brain Tumor Imaging Agents

Collaborative Metabolic Studies

Selenium Tumor-Imaging Studies (Early '70s)

Other Isotope Research

Alpha Emitter Studies Using Radioactive Isotopes

Difficulties Involved With Using Human Volunteers

Alpha Emitter Studies Using Radioactive Isotopesr

HARPER: Yeah. Well, it's sort of in parallel to the alpha emitter studies.
FISHER: Which I would like you to talk about a little bit now.
HARPER: Atcher189 was running this.
FISHER: Robert Atcher.
HARPER: And the gynecologists, mostly Jacob Rotmensch.190
FISHER: Rotmensch?
HARPER: This group was working at Argonne for eight or ten years, I think and were hopefully bringing it to clinical use. I got into the act when they were doing biodistribution studies here. They hadn't done them out at Argonne; they did the toxicity studies.

[They were working with the thorium-228, radium-228, lead-212, and bismuth-212 in dogs.]
FISHER: Dogs.
HARPER: And what turned up was a vastly irregular localization of their [agent in the peritoneal] cavity, such as one I showed you in the rats.
FISHER: With iodine-131? Yttrium-90; I'm sorry.
HARPER: No, the ones that I showed there are yttrium-90 and gold.
FISHER: Gold-198.
HARPER: We looked at the 32P localization as chromic phosphate. There are some publications in the literature showing images that are, again, vastly irregular.

That, plus the fact that our technologist came to me and said, "Gee, this sample that's supposed to have a 10-hour half-life is"—this was lead-203 and -212—"is still hot [(radiologically active)] after several months! What will I do with it?"

So he went back to the chemists at Argonne who [had] made the generator, and it became obvious that what we were dealing with was thorium.

And we calculated [that] a microcurie of thorium, had approximately the same energy emission over its decay period as 10 millicuries of the lead-212, due mostly to the half-life difference. That didn't seem like a good thing to put in people.

The people in Argonne came up with an answer to this [problem]. Using the Spec resin, which binds strongly to lead, made it possible to milk the radium generator that made the lead. Then, after the lead came off and went through the column, the lead was fixed and the impurity traces could be washed off successfully. [Finally,] the bismuth daughter could be removed from the lead, or, if you wanted to, you could strip the lead off the column with ammonium carbonate, and use it in that form. We haven't done that.
FISHER: Bismuth-212 has a short half-life?
HARPER: One hour.
FISHER: That makes it difficult to work with in some applications.
HARPER: Well, we took that into consideration as a possible advantage. We didn't know whether the bismuth would form clumps or not, but we thought that, possibly, it took a while for the clumps to form if you put it in the peritoneal cavity. That short–half-life material would float around more-or-less uniformly; and if clumps formed later on, it wouldn't matter, because the radioactivity would be gone.
FISHER: Perhaps for that application it's ideal.
HARPER: That's what we thought might be the case.
FISHER: If you can get it into the cells or in close proximity to cells that you want to irradiate—
HARPER: Well, we tried this in animals, in rabbits, putting in ionic bismuth, not colloidal material, and 80 to 90 percent [of] it had apparently stayed in the peritoneal cavity in the two-hour period during which most of [the radiation dose] takes place.

We were able to recover [injected activity] by washing out the peritoneal cavity, measuring the activity which was still [present] there.

So it looked as though it would be the ideal agent for killing cells floating around in the peritoneal fluid or just sitting on the peritoneal surfaces. This, of course, we will have to confirm [later].

Some studies had been done out at Argonne by Rotmensch some years ago, using bismuth to kill tumor cells in mice. He was able, without killing the mice, to get some permanent survivors, so there is reason to suspect that this will be efficacious.
FISHER: Roger Maeklis,191 when he was at Harvard, also did something like this with tumor mice and found effective irradiation of those tumors.
HARPER: With what?
FISHER: With bismuth-212.
HARPER: He did?
FISHER: I think. Or was it astatine-211?192
HARPER: I think it was astatine.193
FISHER: It must have been.
HARPER: Astatine is the ideal agent, but it's too hard to get hold of.
FISHER: It must have been astatine-211.
HARPER: I think it was astatine. That was done at the Brigham [and Women's Hospital, Boston]?
FISHER: Yes.
HARPER: Yeah, I think they were working on that there.
FISHER: I think he had that flown over from England on the Concorde [(supersonic jet airliner)].
HARPER: Might be. Twelve-hour half-life on that [(astatine-211)].
FISHER: Seven hours.
HARPER: Seven hours, you're right.
FISHER: You're close.
HARPER: Not that close.
FISHER: That's really interesting. But, as far as you know, the bismuth-212 hasn't been used in any humans so far in this country?
HARPER: I don't think so.
FISHER: I think astatine-211 has been used in England.
HARPER: It may well have been.
FISHER: On one or two humans.
HARPER: Well, that's hard to make; you have to bombard bismuth with just the right energy, or you get a lot of polonium.

Yeah, well, [about] 27 MeV.194
FISHER: Something like that.
HARPER: One of the things that impresses me about this account of what our accomplishments is the fact of how frequently we're presented with a problem, and it isn't for a long interval, maybe years, before, suddenly, the solution leaps out.

Difficulties Involved With Using Human Volunteers

FISHER: What have you found to be the most difficult aspect of working with radioactive materials in human subjects; first of all normal human subjects and then, patients with cancer?
HARPER: No real problems, short of the regulations, which we didn't have to face at first.
FISHER: Did you develop your own techniques for radiation protection and handling of isotopes [and] waste disposal?
HARPER: No, we did what was conventional at the time.
LATHROP: Well, to some extent, we did develop techniques.
HARPER: We made one horrible mistake once: we disposed of our excess radioiodine into a big carboy [(plastic jug)] under the hood, overlooking the fact that it was full of acid.
FISHER: And it vaporized.
HARPER: And, after a while, anything we touched—
LATHROP: After a while, it [(the evaporated acid)] was a big [radioactive] background that kept bothering when we were counting.
HARPER: Yeah. Anything you touched came up hot.
FISHER: [The acid] volatized the iodine.
HARPER: Right. Well, that's the sort of mistake you shouldn't make, but there wasn't anybody around to point it out to us at the time.
LATHROP: But at least we were—
HARPER: —we recognized it when it happened.
LATHROP: Yes.
FISHER: Did you go to the next step and do any thyroid counting195 on yourselves to see if you had iodine uptakes?
HARPER: No.
LATHROP: We were pretty sure we did have some, but it wasn't [a large amount.]
HARPER: We were aware that it takes 100 millicuries to ablate196 a thyroid, and we weren't anywhere near that.
FISHER: That's true.
LATHROP: Rather early in my career in working with radioactivity, I developed a thyroid nodule,197 and the physician wanted to [do a thyroid scan]; [it turned out that] it had nothing to do with my working with radioactivity. I come from a family that has thyroid disease. My grandmother had a beautiful, great big tumor down here (points to her neck) on her thyroid; at one time, this was thought to be [a tumor.]
HARPER: You've got the Oak Ridge paper, with the figures in it [of this]?
LATHROP: At one time, this protuberance in the neck was thought to be a sign of beauty, that was back, several centuries ago. But anyway, I developed a thyroid tumor—
HARPER: —upper right-hand corner.
LATHROP: This was discovered on a routine health examination at the Argonne National Laboratory, and they urged me to see a physician. I did, and the first thing they wanted to do was to give me [a thyroid scan using 131I].
HARPER: A millicurie?
LATHROP: Oh, a millicurie of 131I, for a scan?

(laughter)
LATHROP: This seemed to me like it was something that I really didn't want to do; so, anyway, the nodule was removed. Another thing—
FISHER: Was it removed surgically?
LATHROP: Yes.
FISHER: Rather than with iodine-131?
HARPER: It was a "cold" nodule [(not actively producing hormone)].
FISHER: A cold nodule?
LATHROP: Yes. [So it wouldn't have taken up activity.] But also, in addition to that—talking about the use of radioactivity—when I first came to Chicago, my two oldest children, the only ones we had at that time, were four and six years old, I think, something like that.

We had been, as I told you, living in Wyoming. We came to Chicago, where there were all sorts of diseases that we hadn't been exposed to, and all of us were having frequent respiratory diseases. The doctor that was seeing the children wanted to give them radiation, and I had learned enough by that time that I was a little scared about this.

I consulted Dr. Lisco, who was an M.D., in the Biology Division. He said "No," he thought it would be better not [to do it]. And I've never regretted that we didn't have it done.
FISHER: It sounds like—
HARPER: I have an experience, an anecdote about that. I was on a panel once; we were discussing this sort of thing, and I brought up the question of radiation of the neck leading to thyroid disease, thyroid carcinoma.

The [person] sitting next to me was a therapist, and he jumped up and said, "This is absolutely ridiculous! There is not a possibility! We do this all the time!" Six months later, his son turned up with carcinoma of the thyroid [following x ray to the neck.]
FISHER: His own son?
HARPER: His own son, whom he had treated.
YUFFEE: Tough way to learn your lesson.
FISHER: It sounds like each of you have, although you've worked extensively with isotopes, tracers, [and] radioactive materials, that you've developed a cautious respect for the hazards associated with radiation, and you've treated these with some care to protect not only yourselves, but others, from radiation, unnecessary exposures to radiation.
HARPER: But we're not paranoid.
FISHER: Not paranoid to work with them.
HARPER: No.
FISHER: And not paranoid to use them—
HARPER: —to accept modest amounts of radiation.
FISHER: —where they can be used as tools for diagnosis of disease—
HARPER: Right.
FISHER: —for therapy of otherwise untreatable cancer and other applications. I was impressed with both of you and your scientific curiosity and your willingness to explore new options for solving problems in medicine using isotopes.
HARPER: One of the things that one hears from time to time is that some young man makes a great discovery and then will waste the rest of his life working out the details of his great discovery.

The opposite principle is, when you've made a great discovery, abandon it and go on to something else.

(laughter)
HARPER: We've conformed to this last idea more than the former, I think.
FISHER: Perhaps that is one reason why anyone reading your résumé cannot help to be impressed by the breadth of your knowledge and experience.
HARPER: Yeah. And that's why I've been called a phenomenologist.198
FISHER: And not just a surgeon, but an interesting scientist. I've also been impressed with this more-than-40–year collaboration between you and Katherine Lathrop.
HARPER: I told you earlier how I phrased that. ["I provided the ingenuity and Katherine provided the scholarship."]
LATHROP: Well, it just worked.
FISHER: (to Yuffee) Michael, can I ask you if you have any more concluding questions before we finish?
YUFFEE: I don't. I basically wanted to close out with a few more personal comments, which we have. So I guess that's it.

Thank you for agreeing to speak with us, and we appreciate your time.
HARPER: I've been doing some historical reading recently about the problems of science—physics and astronomy and so forth—and it has been absolutely amazing how the great people in the past have had absolute blind spots toward future developments.

[Sir Arthur Stanley] Eddington199 refused to accept anything about black holes, even though [astrophysicist Subrahmanyan] Chandrasekhar200 [at the University of Chicago] was working in his laboratory. This pattern is repeated and repeated and repeated, all through physics and chemistry, over the centuries.

Well, we really can't make a judgment about that. It's going to take more years than we have.
HARPER: Well, we've done it ourselves.
LATHROP: Well, we've overlooked a few things.
HARPER: The brain scan that we didn't recognize as a brain scan. The technetium we didn't recognize as the way of the future.
FISHER: Who would have guessed that technetium-99m would become the most used radionuclide in the world?
HARPER: Dr. Gottschalk had an interesting comment about that once when he was making an introductory speech somewhere for the Society [of Nuclear Medicine,] (I think that's when he was president,) that if somebody came to a funding agency with a new isotope that nobody had ever heard of with a mode of decay that nobody had ever heard of before and a half-life that was only a few hours, no way would he have gotten funding.

(laughter)
FISHER: Yes, I can relate to that, Dr. Harper, because of my interest in radium-223.
HARPER: Of course.
FISHER: Which no one is using yet, and has had not clinical or animal applications since the 1950s.
HARPER: Well, you'll have to cure some mouse cancers with it before [it flies].
FISHER: Well, certainly, the alpha emitters have great promise for therapy of cancer.

I think, with that, we'll thank you and Katherine Lathrop. May I first, before we turn off the tape, ask what your age is, Katherine?
LATHROP: Same as his.
FISHER: Seventy-nine?
HARPER: Seventy-nine in July.
FISHER: Seventy-nine in July.
LATHROP: He's in July and I'm in June.
FISHER: So you're both the same age, still collaborating at the University of Chicago Hospital, both of you at the age of 79, and still doing very productive work. Katherine a member of the MIRD Committee, Paul still active in the Society of Nuclear Medicine.

Thank you very much.
HARPER: Not active in the Society, but active in—
FISHER: In the field?
HARPER: In the field.
HARPER: Well, we've done it ourselves.
LATHROP: Well, we've overlooked a few things.
HARPER: The brain scan that we didn't recognize as a brain scan. The technetium we didn't recognize as the way of the future.
FISHER: Who would have guessed that technetium-99m would become the most used radionuclide in the world?
HARPER: Dr. Gottschalk had an interesting comment about that once when he was making an introductory speech somewhere for the Society [of Nuclear Medicine,] (I think that's when he was president) that if somebody came to a funding agency with a new isotope that nobody had ever heard of with a mode of decay that nobody had ever heard of before and a half-life that was only a few hours, no way would he have gotten funding.

(laughter)
FISHER: Yes, I can relate to that, Dr. Harper, because of my interest in radium-223.
HARPER: Of course.
FISHER: Which no one is using yet, and has had not clinical or animal applications since the 1950s.
HARPER: Well, you'll have to cure some mouse cancers with it before [it flies].
FISHER: Well, certainly, the alpha emitters have great promise for therapy of cancer.

I think, with that, we'll thank you and Katherine Lathrop. May I first, before we turn off the tape, ask what your age is, Katherine?
LATHROP: Same as his.
FISHER: Seventy-nine?
HARPER: Seventy-nine in July.
FISHER: Seventy-nine in July.
LATHROP: He's in July and I'm in June.
FISHER: So you're both the same age, still collaborating at the University of Chicago Hospital, both of you at the age of 79, and still doing very productive work. Katherine a member of the MIRD Committee, Paul still active in the Society of Nuclear Medicine.

Thank you very much.
HARPER: Not active in the Society, but active in—
FISHER: In the field?
HARPER: In the field.
HARPER: Well, we've done it ourselves.
LATHROP: Well, we've overlooked a few things.
HARPER: The brain scan that we didn't recognize as a brain scan. The technetium we didn't recognize as the way of the future.
FISHER: Who would have guessed that technetium-99m would become the most used radionuclide in the world?
HARPER: Dr. Gottschalk had an interesting comment about that once when he was making an introductory speech somewhere for the Society [of Nuclear Medicine,] (I think that's when he was president) that if somebody came to a funding agency with a new isotope that nobody had ever heard of with a mode of decay that nobody had ever heard of before and a half-life that was only a few hours, no way would he have gotten funding.

(laughter)
FISHER: Yes, I can relate to that, Dr. Harper, because of my interest in radium-223.
HARPER: Of course.
FISHER: Which no one is using yet, and has had not clinical or animal applications since the 1950s.
HARPER: Well, you'll have to cure some mouse cancers with it before [it flies].
FISHER: Well, certainly, the alpha emitters have great promise for therapy of cancer.

I think, with that, we'll thank you and Katherine Lathrop. May I first, before we turn off the tape, ask what your age is, Katherine?
LATHROP: Same as his.
FISHER: Seventy-nine?
HARPER: Seventy-nine in July.
FISHER: Seventy-nine in July.
LATHROP: He's in July and I'm in June.
FISHER: So you're both the same age, still collaborating at the University of Chicago Hospital, both of you at the age of 79, and still doing very productive work. Katherine a member of the MIRD Committee, Paul still active in the Society of Nuclear Medicine.

Thank you very much.
HARPER: Not active in the Society, but active in—
FISHER: In the field?
HARPER: In the field.




Previous page Table of Contents