The Human Plutonium Injection Experiments

examinations were conducted.

After the plutonium injection, urine and

stool samples were collected over a pe-

riod ranging from 22 to 65 days.  Urine

was collected as 24-hour samples, ex-

cept on the first day when two 12-hour

samples were taken.  Fecal samples

were collected daily for the first few

days, then generally pooled at 4-day in-

tervals.  Blood samples were obtained at

“frequent intervals” after the injection.

By March 1946, Langham had excre-

tion data from HP-12 at Oak Ridge for

89 days after the injection and from the

first seven Rochester patients for some

25 days.  After reviewing these data,

Langham informed Bassett on March

13 that:

The work here is coming along

nicely.  I went over some of our

data with our medical physicist

[Joseph G. Hoffman].  We tried to

extrapolate our excretion curves

and derive a mathematical expres-

sion for calculating the amount of

material remaining in the body at

ten and fifteen years.  He was

alarmed and disappointed that we

had not followed the excretion fur-

ther in each case.  It is his opinion

that the result should be followed

to 244 days in order that an accu-

rate mathematical interpretation

can be made.  This emphasizes to

me the necessity of our trying to

get each patient back into the hos-

pital for an occasional study if it is

possible from your point of view.

In fact, additional urine and fecal sam-

ples had been collected in Rochester

from three of the patients (HP-2, HP-4,

and HP-7) about 80 days after their in-

jections, although Langham did not re-

alize this because of a tabulation error.

(The analyses were done in a secure

area—“behind the fence”—whereas

Langham worked in the “rat lab” out-

side, and when the data were trans-

ferred, the final compilation made them

appear to be a continuation of the earli-

er sequential data after day 25.)  In re-

sponse to Langham’s letter, additional

urine and fecal samples were collected

for HP-8 continuously out to day 65

after the injection and for HP-9 and

206

Los Alamos Science Number 23  1995

Wright Haskell Langham—1911-1972

As you can see, I have not made any great contributions to science.  I have never

been a scientific bride—so to speak—but I have been a bridesmaid at some of the

biggest and most interesting scientific weddings in history.

Wright Langham penciled those words on note paper during an interview regarding

the book “The Bombs of Palomares.”  A humble statement from a man who be-

came known throughout the biomedical world as “Mr. Plutonium.”  Langham was, in

fact, one of the great pioneers in what became the modern field of health physics.

Born in Winsburro, Texas, May 21, 1911, and raised in a nonacademic, nonprofes-

sional environment, Langham put himself through every measure of his schooling

by hard work.  He attended Panhandle A.&M. College (B.S., chemistry, 1934), Ok-

lahoma A.&M. College (M.S., chemistry, 1935), and the University of Colorado

(Ph.D., biochemistry, 1943).  After receiving his doctorate, Langham joined the Plu-

tonium Project at the Met Lab in Chicago, and in 1944, he came to Los Alamos.

Eventually, he went on to become Associate Division Leader for Biomedical Re-

search before his untimely death in a local air-commuter crash in 1972.

Although educated in biochemistry, Langham’s major contributions were made in

the fields of radiation biology and radiation toxicology.  As discussed at length in

the main article, Langham helped develop, in 1945, the early bioassay procedures

for estimating plutonium body burdens.  From the data gathered in the plutonium

injection experiments, he determined the universally used “Langham equation” for

plutonium excretion.  He was active in stimulating and correlating nearly all of the

toxicological work on plutonium and related elements for Los Alamos, Argonne,

Rochester, and later, the programs at Utah and other laboratories.  He took an ac-

tive part in determining the values for the maximum permissible body burden of

plutonium and derived allowable air and water concentrations for exposure to pluto-

nium, figures that stand essentially unchanged today.  There is no major work in

the field of plutonium toxicology that does not bear the hallmark of his work and

The Human Plutonium Injection Experiments

---

HP-10 through day 36 and day 30, 

respectively.  

Within a year, five of the subjects had

died from their diagnosed illnesses and

tissue samples were obtained from three

of these cases: HP-5, a 56-year-old man

with Lou Gehrig’s disease who died of

bronchopneumonia; HP-9, a 64-year-old

male with dermatomyositis (an inflam-

matory reaction of unknown cause 

involving degenerative changes of skin

and muscle) who also died of bron-

chopneumonia; and HP-11, an 69-year-

old man suffering from alcoholism,

malnutrition, dyspnea, and abdominal

swelling who was moribund at the time

of the injection and lived only 6 more

days.  These tissue samples were ana-

lyzed to help determine the distribution

of plutonium in the body.

The injection doses for the 11 patients

ranged from 4.6 to 6.5 micrograms of

plutonium-239, resulting in effective

dose-equivalents that ranged from about

24 to 43 rem per year, or about 67 to

120 times the U.S. average annual ef-

fective dose-equivalent from natural

and manmade radiation sources.  The

total dose received by each patient was,

therefore, mainly a function of the

number of years they lived after the in-

jection.  These total doses ranged from

0.6 rem (for HP-11, who lived 6 days)

to 1000 rem (for HP-8, who lived al-

most 30 more years).

Two more Chicago patients. Halfway

through the Rochester injection experi-

ments, the Chicago Health Division, on

December 27, 1945, authorized the in-

jection of two additional patients with

plutonium.  Both patients were consid-

ered terminal: one was a 56-yr-old

woman with metastasized breast cancer

who was close to death; the other was a

young adult male who most likely had

Hodgkin’s disease.  These two patients,

because they were terminal, were in-

jected with 95 micrograms of plutoni-

um-239, the largest amounts (in terms

of mass of plutonium and amount of ra-

dioactivity) injected into any of the

eighteen plutonium-injection patients.

Because of the short survival times

after injection (17 days and about 170

The Human Plutonium Injection Experiments

Number 23  1995  Los Alamos Science  

207

ideas, either by direct contribution or by reference to his publications.  No major in-

cident involving plutonium contamination went without the benefit of his direct par-

ticipation or consultation.  He was in constant demand by both the military and the

federal government in nearly every biomedical phase of the development of nuclear

energy.

Langham may well be identified with his plutonium toxicology work, but it must also

be remembered he made invaluable contributions in other areas of radiobiology.

He participated in studies of the ultimate effects of low levels and high doses of ra-

diation and in an intensive program on the biological effectiveness of diverse types

of radiation in a variety of animal species.  That work eventually led him to consid-

er the radiobiological problems of manned space flight and similar work for NASA

and the National Academy of Sciences Space Science Board.  Under the auspices

of the Space Science Board, he wrote the definitive volume on radiobiological fac-

tors in manned space flight.

Langham authored or coauthored numerous scientific papers and reviews and held

positions of leadership on many committees, among them the first Chairman of the

National Council on Radiation Protection SubCommittee on Relative Biological Ef-

fectiveness from 1957 to 1960.  He was a member of the Health Physics Society

and served on the board of directors (1958-61) and as president (1968-69).

Langham was extremely efficient, a superb organizer, and could be counted on to

speak up for his convictions both as a researcher and as an administrator.  For ex-

ample, he sponsored and encouraged liquid-scintillation-detector development (see

“Los Alamos Radiation Detectors for Biology and Medicine,” page 274).  He was

never one to be over-impressed by authority, whether it be by rank, position, or lin-

eage.  As told by those who knew him, he would always champion the safety and

health of the workers responsible for handling the new-age metal, plutonium. 

s

continued on page 210

---