[ RadSafe ] Psychological Impacts of Chernobyl; Busby response

[Steven Dapra]

April 29

         My comments will be interspersed with arrows before and 
after them (<<<<< . . . >>>>>).

Steven Dapra


At 11:50 AM 4/29/2011, you wrote:
>Dear everyone,
>I have never claimed lots of abortions after Chernobyl. Just to put 
>the matter straight.
>
>And regarding the Dapra statement, I have only just seen what he 
>said about the infant leukemias. He is the second one of you to 
>address this issue though it took him long enough.

<<<<<
         I am assuming that Dr. Busby means he just saw my reply to 
him today --- Friday.  I posted the reply on the evening of Sunday 
the 24th.  I also sent it to him via private e-mail on the morning of 
the 26th.

         The reason it took me "long enough" is that first, as much 
as I like RADSAFE I have a life
other than here.  Somewhat more to the point, I went to the library 
and read some of the literature cited by Dr. Busby.
 >>>>>

>Basically he is saying there were no excess infant leukemias in the 
>Chernobyl fallout in utero cohort. The 5 difference groups got it 
>wrong. Is that a fair analysis? Or have I missed something?
>Incidentally, the paper on the Scottish infant leukemias was by the 
>Oxford-based Childhood cancer Research Group.

<<<<<
         I, Steven Dapra, did NOT say there were no excess infant 
leukemias.  This was said by the researchers who studied the 
leukemias.  I am merely quoting what they said.  If Dr. Busby finds 
their conclusions objectionable, I suggest that he take it up with 
the researchers and not with me.

         I do not know who the "5 difference groups" are, nor have I 
read their studies.  Hence, I can not comment on what they said, nor 
can I comment on whether or not they prepared a "fair analysis."

         Dr. Busby appears to be surprised by my quoting the cited 
literature as saying there were no excess leukemias.  (He asks, "Or 
have I missed something?")  I think he missed reading the literature 
he cited, for if he had read it he would have found --- as I did, and 
as I reported here --- that there were no excess leukemias.

         Dr. Busby did not give a citation (today) for the "the paper 
on the Scottish infant leukemias" [I assume that it is the letter to 
the Lancet by Gibson, et al.; (1988, 2, 630).]  If my assumption is 
correct, this is not a paper, it is a letter of approximately one 
column.  The authors (Gibson, Eden, Barrett, Stiller, and Draper) are 
not identified in the Lancet as being connected with the Oxford-based 
Childhood cancer Research Group.
 >>>>>

>The French IRSN report saying that ICRP was questionable has been 
>translated into English for those who cant read French.

<<<<<
         Since I don't know how to obtain the English translation, I 
can't comment on the IRSN report.
 >>>>>

>Well thats one way to do it I suppose. Cant argue with that. All 5 
>goups made up the data. Nice one Steven.

<<<<<
         I'm not certain of how to construe this.  I didn't know 
about the five difference groups until today.  If Dr. Busby is 
insinuating that I did so, I emphatically and categorically deny that 
I accused anyone of making up any data.
 >>>>>

>By the way, what are Mr Dapras qualifications? Has he done any 
>research? Has he published anything in the peer review literature? I 
>havent found anything published by him or his sidekick Helbig. 
>Except attacks on me of course.

<<<<<
         On April 26, M. Sato inquired about my credentials.  My 
answer now is the same as my answer then.   If Dr. Busby --- or 
anyone --- finds any errors of fact or interpretation in my critique 
of his leukemias article please publish them here for all of us to 
read and evaluate.

         Have I done any research?  I went to the library and read 
the literature Dr. Busby cited --- that he apparently did not read, 
as I noted above.  Does that constitute research?  Roger Helbig is 
not my "sidekick."  I have never met Mr. Helbig, and know him only 
through RADSAFE.

         As far as attacks are concerned, who derided Dr. Otto Raabe 
about his work?  Who sneers at the ICRP and rather broadly suggests 
that he knows more about radioactivity than it does?  Who called 
Nature a "rag"?  Who derided me for taking so long to reply to Dr. 
Busby's article?
 >>>>>

>Sincerely
>Chris
>
>Marne
>France
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Steven Dapra
>Sent: Fri 29/04/2011 01:10
>To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
>Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Psychological Impacts of Chernobyl
>
>April 28
>
>          Chris Busby talks nonsense and is
>reluctant to substantiate any of his claims.  He
>is a chemist, not a health physicist.  He
>considers himself to be more of an authority on
>radioactivity than is the ICRP.  He finally gave
>a few citations, some of them to Nature.  Then,
>in another e-mail he called Nature a "rag."
>
>          He complained loud and long that no one
>would address his claims about infant leukemias
>in the aftermath of Chernobyl.  When I posted a
>message here directly addressing his claims about
>said leukemias he dropped out of sight.  Does
>that sound like a "debate", much less an "honest debate"?
>
>          In my estimation, calling Nature a
>"rag," or claiming the Fukushima accident will
>lead to hundreds of thousands of additional
>cancers, does not exactly constitute "divergent points of view."
>
>          The "fact of the matter is" that most of
>the world does not care about the benefits or
>risks of the peaceful use of radioactive
>materials.  One can't even lead this horse to
>water, let alone make him drink.
>
>          Busby and his fellow travelers are not
>filling any void of inadequate education.  What
>they are doing is spewing more hogwash into an already vast ocean of hogwash.
>
>          And, yes, next time I'll really let you know what I think.
>
>Steven Dapra
>
>
>At 01:00 PM 4/28/2011, you wrote:
> >Franz,
> >
> >You ask why Chris Busby still gets space on radsafe. Radsafe would be much
> >less interesting without the debate that comes from divergent points of
> >view. The fact of the matter is, our industry has not done a good enough job
> >of educating the world on the benefits and true risks related to the
> >peaceful use of radioactive materials. People like Mr. Busby have rushed in
> >to fill that void. We all win with honest debate.
> >
> >Rich Gallego

[edit]