AW: AW: AW: [ RadSafe ] Re: "Science" reports on background radiation andhealth

[Muckerheide, James]

Hi Bernie,

CDC Wonder has longevity data.  But those results were done with your radon
data (and the EPA radon data?) a couple of years ago by Ruth Sponsler.  Did
that ever get pub'd?

Regards, Jim Muckerheide


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bernard Cohen [mailto:blc+ at pitt.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 12:35 PM
> To: John Jacobus
> Cc: Rainer.Facius at dlr.de; blc at pitt.edu; Muckerheide, James;
> maurysis at ev1.net; cdn-nucl-l at mailman1.cis.mcmaster.ca;
> mbrexchange at list.ans.org; radsafe at radlab.nl
> Subject: Re: AW: AW: AW: [ RadSafe ] Re: "Science" reports on background
> radiation andhealth
> 
> 
> 
> John Jacobus wrote:
> 
> >Dr. Cohen,
> >Do your studies include high background radiation
> >levels?
> >
>        ---They include background levels ranging from 0.4 pCi/L  to 6.5
> pCi/L. The data are very significant statistically up to about 4 p/Ci/L
> which corresponds to about  5-10 rem/y to the bronchial regions
> 
> >  Did you look at longevity or only cancers?
> >
>        ---I only reported on lung cancer but could extend the studies to
> other cancers if that would be of interest. Do you know where I can get
> data on longevity fir U.S. counties?
> 
> >
> >Again, I am not interested in radon, but with ambient
> >exposures.
> >
>        ---What is the definition of "ambient exposures"? The article in
> Science discussed natural background radiation, not ambient exposures.
>