[ RadSafe ] Re: Cancer reduction by Radiation

John Jacobus crispy_bird at yahoo.com
Thu Jun 29 11:19:27 CDT 2006

Dr. Long,
Thanks for the offer, and if you are willing to pay I
would not mind going to Portland.  

I doubt that your giving away books at the LLNL of
Citizens Against a Radioactive Environment will have
much effect.  I admire your efforts to change their
minds, but I think that the history of groups like
this are clear.  They have a position that they will
stick with.  Beyond the fact that they "annoy" you,
what harm have they done?

What makes you think that double-blind studies are the
only ones accepted by bureaucrats?  

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

> I just ordered from Laissez Faire Books, 10 more
> copies of Hiserodt's "Underexposed: What If
> Radiation Is Good For You". My marked-up cc I gave
> to a grand daughter just starting a college major in
> Environmental Science. Some, I may give out at the
> next public meeting at LLNL of Citizens Against a
> Radioactive Environment (the very name indicating
> their ignorance). It cites hundreds of studies,
> putting in lay terms some of the studies in
> Muckerheide's great file.
>   John, I hope to see you at the Portland meeting
> Aug 5, questioning Hiserodt, B Cohen, Ted Rockwell,
> George Gilder and other speakers. More time with
> them may be available on our bus tour Aug4, Mt St
> Helens. The presentations are not dumbed- down.  All
> are welcome. See  www.oism.org/ddp for program.
>   Double-blind experimentation is a gold standard
> applied by bureaucrats for "evidence-based medicine"
>  I am happy you acknowledge that it is often
> unnecessary, John
>   Howard Long MD MPH (Epidemiology, UCB)
> John Jacobus <crispy_bird at yahoo.com> wrote:
>   Dr. Long,
> Not being an epidemiologist, I doubt your
> qualifications to comment on the work of Dr. Laun or
> the late Dr. Cameron. A low p-value does not mean
> the
> work is relevant, only that the MATHEMATICS shows a
> strong correlation. However, it the data is
> inappropriate or there are confounding factors that
> bias the data, the p-value is irrelevant. I have yet
> to understand why you cannot understand this idea.
> Or
> possible you do not care if the information is bias
> as
> long as it meets your believe. 
> I have cited work that refuted Dr. Cameron's claims
> by
> individuals who have looked at the Shipyard study. 
> Again, I have argued with Dr. Laun and we BOTH agree
> that more, relevant work needs to be funded. 
> This work has nothing to do with double blind
> testing
> of penicillin in pneumonia or smoking. Why did you
> mention double blind testing? To confuse the
> discussion?
> --- howard long wrote:
> > The paper by Luan in JAPS gives better evidence
> that
> > radiation prevents cancer (p<0.001) than we have
> for
> > effectiveness of most therapies in medicine. 
> > 
> > So does the Cameron analysis of NSWS. 
> > 
> > Double blind experiments were not conducted for
> > penicillin in pneumonia because the effectiveness
> > was so obvious, as in the above.
> > 
> > Of course stopping smoking is even better proven,
> > and also has no double blind experiments..
> > 
> > Howard Long MD MPH
> > 
> > 
> > John Jacobus wrote:
> > 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."
> > 
> > > yuan-chi luan wrote:
> > > Dear Dr. Cohen:
> > > 
> > > I am glad to have read your letter to Toronto
> > > Glope & mail in showing the the results of your
> 25
> > > years studies of radon gas whether dangerous to
> > > humankind, that the US population in the high
> > > average radon level county, have 30% of less
> lung
> > > cancer deaths in the low average radon level
> > > counties. Therefore the EPA of US and Canada
> > > governments in trying to reduce the radon
> > > concentration in homes and water are really
> > > unnecessary and unreasonable.. 

"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 

More information about the RadSafe mailing list