AW: [ RadSafe ] Significant results in abstracts

Rainer.Facius at Rainer.Facius at
Fri Oct 6 11:31:07 CDT 2006

Not really, John:

Of course I did read the paper including 9 papers quoted by Gotzsche to make sure I grasp the context. Only afterwards did I post.

In doing so, I was thinking of the BEIR VII-2 committee which at least in 4 cases quoted (approvingly) 'momentous' radioepidemiological studies apparently only from reading the abstracts, where the text and/or the data do not sustain or rather contradict the claim made in the abstract. 

Furthermore, ALL radioepidemiological studies are covered by Pubmed.

BTW: Regarding one of these studies, a member of the ICRP main commission remarked in a recent controversial 'public' discussion to me: "Forget about this study" (one which supported BEIR-VII and hence was distinctively endorsed by them) and regarding a more recent one (even more 'momentous'): "This one is even worse".

So, I have every reason to allege that the finding of Gotzsche pertains to radioepidemiological studies too - including those claiming to uphold the LNT postulate.

Kind regards, Rainer

Dr. Rainer Facius
German Aerospace Center
Institute of Aerospace Medicine
Linder Hoehe
51147 Koeln
Voice: +49 2203 601 3147 or 3150
FAX:   +49 2203 61970

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: radsafe-bounces at [mailto:radsafe-bounces at] Im Auftrag von John Jacobus
Gesendet: Freitag, 6. Oktober 2006 17:33
An: radsafe
Betreff: Re: [ RadSafe ] Significant results in abstracts

Thanks for point this article out.  However, the list or database that the author cited, PubMeb, is primarily medical articles, not radiation biology.  I assume that you would have understood this if you had read the article and not just the absract.

As I had posted in the past:
>From an article about physicians doing clinical

"It was just before an early morning meeting, and I was really trying to get to the bagels, but I couldn't help overhearing a conversation between one of my statistical colleagues and a surgeon.

Statistician: "Oh, so you have already calculated the P value?"

Surgeon: "Yes, I used multinomial logistic regression."

Statistician: "Really? How did you come up with that?"

Surgeon: "Well, I tried each analysis on the SPSS drop-down menus, and that was the one that gave the smallest P value"."

--- Rainer.Facius at wrote:

> "Significant results in abstracts are common but should generally be 
> disbelieved." !
> Gotzsche P C.
> Believability of relative risks and odds in
> abstracts: cross sectional
> study.
> British Medical Journal 333(2006)231-234
> Queerly, important committees or authors from a "Who is Who" in 
> radiation biology perpetuate such 'conclusions' - apparently without 
> even reading the article let alone looking at the data.
> Rainer

May we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion. 
Dwight D. Eisenhower  

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

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around _______________________________________________
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:

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:

More information about the RadSafe mailing list