I was at Hiroshima, for the first time, just a couple of days ago and of course visited the ABCC. Frankly I was disappointed
at the level of existing work and plans for the future in human genetics, though perhaps I did not see enough, and you or
Matsunaya may set me right. I don't have in mind the radiation effects themselves, so much as the investments in a large
scale health census, and this is not being well planned for genetic analysis. E.G., there are no kindred data on the 100,000
life span samples; when I brought this up, "yes, it is rather embarassing when our social worker calls twice in a month
on the same family." And the follow up on the congenital anomalies, e.g. mayohim[?] is appalling.
This last point, especially ought to be rectified. Your 1956 report pointed out how fishy the apparent numbers were, and
this really ought to be rectified. There is an important issue whether radiation of the ovcyte[?] predisposes to non-disjunction,
and during the next several years women whose ova were just forming in 1945 will be having their first children. So some
plans should be made for much more careful cytogenic work than is now suggested.