AW: AW: AW: [ RadSafe ] In utero dose "Alara Does Work" ?!!

[John Jacobus]

Rainer,
The only claim that I make is that the shipyard study
is not a good study to cite as evidence of beneficial
effect. 

Your comments regarding the Strom paper are immaterial
to the issue I raised.  It is just a distraction,
which appears to be a common tactic.  Similar to my
questions about lung cancer and radiation a few weeks
ago.  

--- Rainer.Facius at dlr.de wrote:

> Dear John,
> 
> for once we appear to reach some kind of minimal
> consensus in that the NSYW study by now has probably
> been superseded by more impressive epidemiological
> and radiobiological arguments against LNT (and
> possibly even for hormesis).
> 
> Regarding the Strom paper I only mentioned it to
> rebut your claim that the quoted argument furnishes
> valid criticism regarding the overall quality of the
> NSYW study. The rest of the argument in this paper
> is irrelevant to our present exchange (although I am
> inclined to favour Cameron's stance - give and take
> some 10s of mSv). 
> 
> Kind regards, Rainer
> 
> 
> Dr. Rainer Facius
> German Aerospace Center
> Institute of Aerospace Medicine
> Linder Hoehe
> 51147 Koeln
> GERMANY
> Voice: +49 2203 601 3147 or 3150
> FAX:   +49 2203 61970
> 
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: John Jacobus [mailto:crispy_bird at yahoo.com] 
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 5. Juli 2006 22:13
> An: Facius, Rainer; hflong at pacbell.net;
> jjcohen at prodigy.net; mike.bohan at yale.edu;
> radsafe at radlab.nl
> Betreff: Re: AW: AW: [ RadSafe ] In utero dose
> "Alara Does Work" ?!!
> 
> Rainer,
> Thank you for your comments.  I believe, and have
> for many years, that this study is not a useful to
> cite either for or against hormesis. 
> 
> It appears obvious to me that you are addressing
> issues about the need to monitor to 100 mSv which is
> not what our original postings were about.  They
> were about the validity of the shipyard study.  
> 
> I will pass your comments along to Dr. Strom.
> 
> --- Rainer.Facius at dlr.de wrote:
> 
> > "The (Navy Shipyard Worker Study) is characterized
> by an unhealthy 
> > control group, making it one of the very few
> studies in occupational 
> > epidemiology not to find a 'health worker
> effect'(Table 1).  This odd 
> > finding challenges the consisttency criterion(15)
> (findings whould be 
> > consistent across studies) and makes the entire
> study suspect.  
> > Comparisons with an unhealthy control group will,
> of course, sho a 
> > protective effect!"
> > 
> > Strom D J, Cameron J R, McDonald J C. Is it useful
> to assess annual 
> > effective doses that are less than 100 mSv.
> (Topics under Debate) 
> > Radiat Prot
> > Dosim98#2(2002)239-245
> > 
> > Dear John:
> > 
> > Thank you for once more providing a copy of this
> (and the other) paper 
> > by Strom.
> > 
> > Inspection of the above argument and the table
> reproduced by Strom 
> > reveals that he backs his criticism with the one
> class of mortality 
> > causes, i.e., cancer mortality for which usually
> no reasons are 
> > provided why the employment medical should have
> prognostic value for 
> > cancer risk and hence would select against cancer
> prone applicants.
> > 
> > Had instead he chosen to look at those causes for
> mortality where the 
> > mechanism for such a selection effect is evident
> and which furnish the 
> > single most frequent cause (close to 43% instead
> of 25% ) for 
> > fatalities, i.e., circulatory diseases, he would
> have seen the healthy 
> > worker effect in its common size.
> > 
> > The validity of his above criticism therefore
> entirely rests upon this 
> > choice of him - and of course on his ignorance of
> the fact that other 
> > known potent cancerogenic agents were identified
> as operating at these 
> > workplaces!
> > 
> > Furthermore, the significant trend for
> non-malignancies (and all 
> > causes) between NW <5 mSv and >5 mSv, does not
> depend on the NNW group 
> > (although I do not want to rest an argument on
> this).
> > 
> > Thank you anyway for sharing your files.
> > 
> > Best regards, Rainer
> > 
> > Dr. Rainer Facius
> > German Aerospace Center
> > Institute of Aerospace Medicine
> > Linder Hoehe
> > 51147 Koeln
> > GERMANY
> > Voice: +49 2203 601 3147 or 3150
> > FAX:   +49 2203 61970
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> +++++++++++++++++++
> "You get a lot more authority when the workforce
> doesn't think it's amateur hour on the top floor."
> GEN. MICHAEL V. HAYDEN, President Bush's nominee for
> C.I.A. director.
> 
> -- 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 
> 


+++++++++++++++++++
"You get a lot more authority when the workforce doesn't think it's amateur hour on the top floor."
GEN. MICHAEL V. HAYDEN, President Bush's nominee for C.I.A. director.

-- 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