AW: [ RadSafe ] AW: Low level radiation and cancer:

[Christian Hofmeyr]

Rainer,
Thanks for your response.  I think we agree on important
points.  What I wanted to emphasise is that the most
sensitive direct test of LNT can be devised by its
prediction regarding collective dose, probably in the
framework of an ecological study.  I am very respectful of
prof Cohen’s work on radon (per implication based on
collective lung dose) and his willingness to make his data
available for scrutiny. However, as I tried to point out in
a closing remark, there are IMO serious problems concerning
particularly lung cancer, and I intend to comment more in
due course.
In view of the claims of hormesis supporters (regarding
health improvement through e.g. stimulation of the immune
system) and the challenge by John Jacobus, there might be
value in considering longevity in areas with different
background radiation levels, rather than focussing on
cancer alone.  Life duration statistics are probably much
more reliable than health (or cause of death) statistics in
many interesting places.   Put simply, this could
indirectly (per implication) provide answers concerning
hormesis and even LNT, mindful of the collective dose
prediction.  The necessary caveats apply.
I gathered from a recent BBC interview with a Nobel
Prize-winning Indian economist that the ‘traditional’
differential between India and China in average life
expectancy was 14 years, 57 in India versus 71 in China.
  The exception was the Indian state of Kerala, where life
expectancy was 76(!).  This was mentioned as an aside, in
no particular context.  The interview was about favourable
developments and had nothing to do with radiation. 
>From our perspective it would be relevant to know what
percentage of the Kerala population lived in high radiation
areas, and, particularly, how life expectancy varied
between high and low radiation areas.  Parthasarathy
pointed out to you that Krishnan Nair et al. (Radiation
Research, 152, p145-148, 1999) preliminarily found no
significant difference in cancer incidence, but I contend
the life duration stats are bound to be more reliable.
Closer to home, the Swedes seem to have the highest life
expectancy and the elevated background conditions are well
known.  The statistics for parts of France and Germany
should also be readily available.  It seems to be a
question of collating available data.
Chris.Hofmeyr at webmail.co.za



On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 15:41:11 +0200
 <Rainer.Facius at dlr.de> wrote:
>Christian:
>
>Your comments by and large hit instead of being off the
>marks.
>
>Yet, in some cases it appears you make things more
>complicated than necessary. E.g., in order to determine
>etc.
_________________________________________________________________
Need software for your hardware? Click here http://www.asg.co.za