AW: [ RadSafe ] Re: LNT/threshold/hormesis - what do HPs really

[Dukelow, James S Jr]

To nitpick about John's anecdote:  It was the 1940 election with
Republican Wendell Wilkie opposing Roosevelt, who was running for a
tradition-breaking third term (a possibility later ruled out by
constitutional amendment).  The poll was conducted by the magazine
Literary Digest and it was a telephone poll.  I showed Wilkie winning in
a landslide, the very opposite of what happened in the actual election.
Literary Digest went bankrupt shortly thereafter.  The whole affair was
taken very seriously by political pollster, who modified their polling
techniques to try to assure polling samples representative of the
eventual electorate.

Best regards.

Jim Dukelow
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
Richland, WA
jim.dukelow at pnl.gov

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On
Behalf Of John Jacobus
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 9:43 AM
To: Rainer.Facius at dlr.de; Clayton.Bradt at labor.state.ny.us;
radsafe at radlab.nl
Subject: Re: AW: [ RadSafe ] Re: LNT/threshold/hormesis - what do HPs
really


Of course, the poll is only a reflection of the
sampling group.  There is a story that a telephone
poll was conducted of the 1932 election between FDR
and Herbert Hoover.  Herbert Hoover won the poll, as
only rich people could afford telephones during the
Great Depression.  (This is an ancedotal story, so do
not take it seriously.)  A poll taken on RADSAF would
only apply to those who subscribe to RADSAF.  And
cared enough to vote.

Rainer, I agree that the issues around the LNT and
hormesis is not about scientific truth.  They are
models of dose response, and neither rise to level of
a scientific theory.