[ RadSafe ] Re: Confirmation of New HP Jobs! - radiation waste in home foundations for hormesis!

John Jacobus crispy_bird at yahoo.com
Thu Dec 28 14:38:20 CST 2006

Dr. Long,
I assume the you did not read the entire paper and
discussion. You should not limit yourself to those
quotes you cherry-pick.  As note:

"Chen et al. (2004) reported a primitive analysis on
a similar cohort population in Taiwan, while
reduced cancer mortality. However, Chen apparently
used group analysis for their exposure, and included
only a portion of the exposed population mentioned in
this study, based only on initial preliminary
community registration by the AEC and not through
detailed registration. Their analysis did not consider
risk factors like attained age, sex, age at initial
exposure et al. No further analyses on the
exposure-dependent risks were conducted.

This study cohort was large enough to detect
statistically significant cumulative
exposure-dependent increases in various cancers in
individuals with initial exposure before age 30. . .

You may also what to check out Table IV.

Did YOU ask Dr. Luan what he thought of this paper? 
Yes, the world plots against you and your beliefs.  

--- howard long <hflong at pacbell.net> wrote:

> John and all,
>   Taiwan regulators also perpetuate their jobs,
> instead of adapting to new knowledge, as shown
> below. 
>   Abstract writers propagandize, often stating the
> opposite of data and conclusions by the
>    authors. Some of this may be from starting with
> false assumptions, such as that 5 rem dose of gamma
> radiation, slow rate, causes cancer. 
>   These quotes from the article show Luan has done
> for that cover-up attempt, what Cameron did for the
> distorted Nuclear Shipyard Workers Study.
>   HP's, get with the NEW job: providing Cameron's
> "essential trace energy"!
>   "Cancer risks in a population with prolonged low
> dose-rate gamma radiation exposure in
> radiocontaminated buildings, 1983-2002”, Hwang, Guo
> et al, in Int J. Radiat. Biol. 8:12
>   (Received 12May 2005; revised 11 Sept. 2006;
> accepted 18 Oct. 2006)
>   Abstract ---
>   Conclusions: The results suggest that prolonged
> low dose rate radiation exposure 
>   appeared to increase the risks of developing
> certain cancers in specific subgroups of this
> population in Taiwan .” 
>   In that abstract, o reference to either:
>   " Table 3 - All Cancers - Observed 95, Expected
> 114.9"
>    or
>   “Discussion
>   --Compared to the reference population, the study
> population had lower incidence of all cancers
> combined,- “
>   John did YOU really read this confirmation of Luan
> and Cameron?
> John Jacobus <crispy_bird at yahoo.com> wrote:
>   Dr. Long,
> I am not sure what my waistline has to do with the
> question I asked you. What do you mean by "recurring
> actions?"
> Nevertheless, if you are suggesting the use of Co-60
> in building construction is a good idea, I would
> suggest that you read the following report, 
> "Cancer risks in a population with prolonged low
> dose-rate (gamma)-radiation exposure in
> radiocontaminated buildings, 1983 – 2002," in Int.
> J.
> Radiat. Biol., Vol. 82, No. 12, December 2006, pp.
> 849
> – 858.
> If you would like a copy, let me know.
> --- howard long wrote:

On Nov. 26, 1942, President Roosevelt ordered nationwide gasoline 
rationing, beginning December 1.   

-- 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 

More information about the RadSafe mailing list