[ RadSafe ] Exposed "had lower incidences of all cancers - " Environmental -

[howard long]

John Jacobus, the paper you refer to did, indeed, mislead in its "Conclusion", comparing its tables and discussion.  
  HPs can judge for themselves:
  "Correspndence: Dr W Peter Chang, Inst. of Environmental Health Sciences, National Y U Med School 155, sec2 Linong St. Taipei112, Taiwan"  
   
  Int.J. Radiat. Biol, Vol82, No.12, Dec. 2006 pp 849-858
  (The Environmental Health Sciences  review by Chang et al of  cancer risks in 7,271 persons exposed to 1 to 2,363 mSv gamma over 23 years),
  "ABSTRACT
  Conclusion [ in entirety],
   The results suggest that prolonged low dose radiation exposure appeared to increase risks of developing certain cancers in specific subgroups  of this population in Taiwan.”
   
   “Received 12 May 2005; revised 11 Sept. 2006; accepted 18 Oct. 2006”.
   
  The opposite impression, much cancer was prevented by the radiation, is clear from its 
   
  Table III “All cancers – Observed  95 Expected 114.9 “
              “Solid cancers – Observed 82 Expected 109.5” and 
  “Discussion: - Compared to the reference population, the study population had lower incidences of all cancers combined, all cancers combined except leukemia and all solid cancers combined (Table III).” 
   
   More seriously misleading is the complete absence of mortality data. 
  No answer to, 
  Is Chronic Radiation an Effective Prophylaxis Against Cancer? by Chen, Luan et al on the same population, published in J Am. Phys. & Surg. 9:1 Spring 2004 available at www.AAPSonline.org  Therein, Death Cause Statistics Abstract of the Health and Vital Statistics for the population of Taiwan published yearly by the Department of Health showed, 
   “ – only two leukemia and five solid cancer deaths were observed.” Chen et al [Luan]comment, “Based on the ICRP model, 70 excess leukemia and solid cancer deaths would be reasonably expected after 20 years, in addition to a number of spontaneous cancer deaths.”
   
  Leukemia, lymphoma and thyroid cancer incidences do seem higher with that dose of radiation. Chang’s table III shows: Observed 39, Expected 14.7. The absence of deaths [except for 2 leukemia] in 20 years of mortality statistics by Chen, suggests less severe and more treatable disease, perhaps made so by the radiation. 
   
  John, who is confused or attempting to obfuscate these clear results? Me? You? The Environmental establishment?
   
  Viva hormesis!
   
  Howard Long
  

John Jacobus <crispy_bird at yahoo.com> wrote:
  Dr. Long,
As you are aware, the NSWS has been questioned as a
reliable study, and the recently published study of
the Taiwan apartment dwellers do not support your
beliefs. Neither work involves a "one tail test."

Is your comment about the Kyoto paper supposed to
confuse you message any more than it already it?

--- howard long wrote:

> John,
> Is your comment from judging others' actions by
> your own?
> 
> In fact, the Taiwan establishment and NSWS
> establishment not only used a one tail test, showing
> only harm and not benefit, they even distorted the
> abstract to give the opposite impression of a
> critical review of the data in the papers, like the
> Kyoto writer of their paper on global warming.
> 
> Dr. Cameron did write me before he died and used
> some of my suggestions to make his language
> unmistakable, that with p<0.001 (or more 0s in
> there) the life expectancy was improved by the extra
> radiation. That is a historic conclusion, one hidden
> by your bureacracy, presumably to protect your jobs.
> 
> Howard Long
> 
> John Jacobus wrote:
> Assuming you sent the information before Dr.
> Cameron
> died, what did he conclude? Of course, the results
> of
> the NSWS were questioned so what does that indicate?
> 
> Poor epidemiological studies should be consided good
> enough if the results are what you want?
> 
> --- Jerry Cuttler wrote:
> 
> > I asked Bernie Cohen what a 40% reduction in
> > mortality of the NSWs meant in terms of increased
> > life expectancy.
> > I recall Bernie's calculation that indicated a 2.8
> > year increase in life expectancy. I sent Bernie's
> > calculation to John Cameron.
> > Jerry