[ RadSafe ] AW: How much of RSH still exists?

[John Jacobus]

Rainier,
Thank you for the reply and your comments. I do not
follow many of the epidemiological publications. My
understanding is that this is a mega-analysis of
previously published studies. I have only a
rudimentary understanding of epidemiological studies.
I would think that those who know more than I would be
better qualified to analyze this report. Do you expect
this will happen based of the journal source, e.g., a
not epidemiological journal? If it is not critized,
does that mean its anaylsis is valid?

--- Rainer.Facius at dlr.de <Rainer.Facius at dlr.de> wrote:
> John:
> 
> Actually I did not critique the Cardis et al. BMJ
2005 paper as it 
> stands simply because it does not offer sufficient
primary data to do 
> so. Furthermore, BMJ is not the proper journal for a
full report on an 
> epidemiologic study of such proportions. 
> 
> Basically, the proper procedure would have been to
first present the 
> full data set in an appropriate journal like
Radiation Research or the 
> like and afterwards a summary like that in BMF would
have been fine. 
> After BMJ did publish the ‘extended abstract’
prematurely, writing 
> to the editor would not have changed anything. And
who am I to interfere 
> with the editorial policy of that journal.  
> 
> Finally, as regards the timing of the BMJ paper, I
find it hard to 
> believe in a chance coincidence of that early BMJ
publication date with 
> the nearly identical publication date of the BEIR
VII-2 report. Now the 
> message of that summary can settle unchallenged for
half a year or 
> longer before a substantiated criticism will become
possible.
> 
> Honi soi qui mal y pense!
> 
> Kind regards, Rainer
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Jacobus [mailto:crispy_bird at yahoo.com]
> Sent: Fri 23.09.2005 19:54
> To: Facius, Rainer; feinendegen at gmx.net;
higsond at bigpond.net.au; 
> rad-sci-l at WPI.EDU; radsafe at radlab.nl
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] AW: How much of RSH still
exists?
>  
> Rainer,
> I note that you have been critical of the Cardis
> paper.  Have you contact the journal editors about
the
> lack of raw data?  If so, what was their response? 
> Since this is a retrospective study, would the data
> not be in the references cited? 
> 
> --- Rainer.Facius at dlr.de wrote:
> 


+++++++++++++++++++
"Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tired anything new."
-- Albert Einstein

-- John
John Jacobus, MS
Certified Health Physicist
e-mail:  crispy_bird at yahoo.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com