AW: [ RadSafe ] Re: Lung cancer reduction

Tue Jun 27 17:17:22 CDT 2006

Hello all - 

Although I have not read the article in question, I am
hesitant about doing a study of radon in the
environment of a coal mine, which is one of the
'dirtiest' atmospheres that I can think of.  Anyone
who has seen a picture of coal miners coming off their
shift can see what I mean.  They are covered with
black soot and the like.  Certainly, they breathe some
of that material and probably swallow a bit of it as
well.  

Confounders that I can think off just off the top of
my head include: 

- whether or not miners smoke (controlled for in a
good study)
- diesel fumes from equipment
- coal dust from mining operations (drilling etc.)
- minor constituent arsenic and other trace elements
in the coal dust
- anthracene and other related complex carbon
compounds that are carcinogens in the coal dust
- how long miners have been exposed to all of the
above

Studies of radon epidemiology should be done with
people who have few other environmental exposures.
This is why Dr. Cohen studied women who rarely held
jobs outside the home during the 1960s and 1950s.

~Ruth

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

> Dear colleague,
>  
> thank you for this pointer. Of course, it does not
> address the point raised by John Jacobus, who denied
> that there might be evidence to the contrary - which
> even is acknowledged as such by the ICRP. 
>  
> Can you provide a pdf copy of your paper?
>  
> Thank you in advance, Rainer
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> Von: Jan Skowronek
> [mailto:jskowronek at ietu.katowice.pl]
> Gesendet: Di 27.06.2006 09:54
> An: Facius, Rainer; crispy_bird at yahoo.com;
> radsafe at radlab.nl
> Betreff: RE: [ RadSafe ] Re: Lung cancer reduction
> 
> 
> 
> P.T. Colleagues,
> 
> See: Skowronek J., Zemla B. - Epidemiology of lung
> and larynx cancers in
> coal mines in Upper Silesia - preliminary results.
> Health Physics, September
> 2003, Volume 85, no 3.
> Increased exposure to radon progeny (but still on
> the level of low doses -
> < some mSv/y)) in coal mines increases risk of lung
> and larynx cancer.
> 
> dr hab. inz. Jan SKOWRONEK
> Instytut Ekologii Terenów Uprzemyslowionych
> Institute for Ecology of Industrial Areas
> ul. Kossutha 6
> 40-844 Katowice/Poland
> tel.: (+48-32) 2540164
> fax: (+48-32) 2541717
> e-mail: jskowronek at ietu.katowice.pl
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl]On Behalf
> Of Rainer.Facius at dlr.de
> Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 1:54 PM
> To: crispy_bird at yahoo.com; radsafe at radlab.nl
> Subject: AW: [ RadSafe ] Re: Lung cancer reduction
> 
> 
> "There is no evidence that increased exposures to
> radiation have done so
> [reduced incidence of lung cancer]."
> 
> Dear John:
> 
> Of course, whether or not your above statement
> holds, depends somewhat on
> what you consider "evidence". Regarding lung cancer,
> even the ICRP concedes
> that the [LNT] atomic bomb survivor risk estimates
> do NOT fit into the
> picture outlined by epidemiological data from truly
> chronic low dose rate
> exposures:
> 
> "For cancers at some sites there is reasonable
> compatibility between the
> data from LSS and those from others sources. However
> it is recognised by the
> Commission that for a number of sites, e.g., lung,
> there are significant
> differences."
> 
> quoted from: 2005 RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
> INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON
> RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION. Draft for consultation.
> §(104) p. 30 and once more
> in annex A, (A13) p. 67)
> 
> I attach a PDF file with 6 diagrams showing such
> significant differences in
> data from some of such 'opposing' studies.(If the
> attachment does not pass
> the moderator, I will provide it upon request)
> 
> Unless you can provide reasons for ignoring these
> findings, my
> interpretation of these data falsifies your above
> statement.
> 
> Kind regards, Rainer
> 
> Sources for the diagrams in the attachment:
> 
> Bogen K T.
> Mechanistic model predicts a U-shaped relation of
> radon exposure to lung
> cancer risk reflected in combined occupational and
> US residential data.
> Human and Experimental Toxicology 17(1998)691-696
> 
> Fleck C M, Schöllnberger H, Kottbauer M M, Dockal T,
> Prüfert U
> Modeling radioprotective mechanisms in the dose
> effect relation at low doses
> and low
> dose rates of ionizing radiation.
> Mathematical Biosciences 155(1999)13-44
> (Fleck et al. and also Bogen successfully model
> different sophisticated
> cellular models (sophisticated in contrast to the
> petty LNT postulate) to
> own data or to data from Cohen B L, Test of the
> linear-no threshold theory
> of radiation carcinogenesis for inhaled radon decay
> products. Health Physics
> 68#2(1995)157-174)
> 
> Cardis E, Gilbert E S, Carpenter L, Howe G, Kato I,
> Armstrong B K, Beral V,
> Cowper G, Douglas A, Fix J, Fry S A, Kaldor J, Lavé
> C, Salmon L, Smith P G,
> Voelz G L, Wiggs L D.
> Effects of low doses and dose rates of external
> ionizing radiation: Cancer
> mortality among nuclear industry workers in three
> countries.
> Radiation Research 142(1995)117-132
> 
> Rossi H H, Zaider M
> Radiogenic lung cancer: the effects of low linear
> energy transfer (LET)
> radiation.
> Radiation and Environmental Biophysics 36(1997)85-88
> 
> Tokarskaya Z B, Okladnikova N D, Belyaeva T D,
> Drozhko E G.
> Multifactorial analysis of lung cancer dose-response
> relationships for
> workers at the Mayak nuclear enterprise.
> Health Physics 73#6(1997)899-905
> 
> 
> 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: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] Im Auftrag
> von John Jacobus
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 25. Juni 2006 19:31
> An: radsafe
> Betreff: [ RadSafe ] Re: Lung cancer reduction
> 
> Dr. Luan,
> If you have serious concerns about the high
> incidents of lung cancers, I
> would think that you would foster the idea the
> people should stop smoking.
> Studies have shown the individual who stop smoking
> have reduced incidents in
> lung cancer.  There is no evidence that increased
> exposures to radiation
> have done so.
> 
> Also, as WE discussed several years ago, your
> statements on reduction of
> cancers in Taiwanese apartment dwellers was at best
> an incompete report.
> At worst, badly flawed.  There has been no further
> study of these people, as
> opposed to the Atomic Bomb survivors.  In your work
> was of limited scope.
> 
> Maybe this is why many professional radiation
> scientist consider this to be
> a "wild story."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing
> list
> 
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have
> read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be
> found at: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html
> 
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe
> and other settings visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/
> 
=== message truncated ===

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