[ RadSafe ] Han Kang's epidemiology

[James Salsman]

Steven Dapra wrote:

> James -- why don't you answer *my* question about Han Kang's
> alleged 2.2 increased risk?  Remember?  The one he made in Gulf War
> Review.  See my e-mail to RADSAFE of Feb. 28.  Did his claim ever
> pass peer review, was it published, and if so, what is the citation?

Think about it:  Kang publishes a 1.8 risk ratio (2.8 for children
of female 1991 combat-deployed troops) in Annals of Epidemiology
in 2001, and critics say that the self-reported surveys must have
been mistaken -- our fighting men and women, the critics say,
must have been lying about their own kids health.

Dr. Margaret Ryan, whose DoD Birth and Infant Health Registry at
the Naval Health Research Center is charged with publication of the
reproductive health records which Kang and Araneta had been
summarizing independently of each other, abruptly stops publishing
tabulated statistics in 2001, writes a letter in response to Araneta's
article (which echoed Kang's claims), saying that Araneta's
methodology was flawed without saying why, and then co-authors
a whitewash with Pat Doyle -- who detected the same increase, by
the way, but discounted it as "reporting error" in her own paper --
calling the 80% increase in birth defects "modest."

So Dr. Kang goes back and reviews 700+ medical records, and
finds that the number of birth defects has increased 20%.  He
publishes that in his agency newsletter.

Then Eric Daxon lies that Kang actually found a decrease after
medical records review, not an increase.

I spoke to Dr. Kang not too long ago, and yes, he is seeking
publication of his most recent findings in the peer reviewed medical
literature.  Please phone him yourself and ask about it if you are
curious.  His telephone number is 202-745-8249.

Sincerely,
James Salsman