[ RadSafe ] Drawing the line between science andpseudo-science. (was Rational Thought)
C.Busby at ulster.ac.uk
Fri Oct 7 02:51:51 CDT 2011
Int J Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2011 Jun;18(5):697-707. Epub 2011 Feb 19.
The human sex odds at birth after the atmospheric atomic bomb tests, after Chernobyl, and in the vicinity of nuclear facilities.
Scherb H, Voigt K.
Institute of Biomathematics and Biometry, Helmholtz Zentrum Muenchen, German Research Center for Environmental Health, Ingolstaedter Landstrasse 1, Neuherberg, 85764, Germany. scherb at helmholtz-muenchen.de
From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Steven Dapra
Sent: Fri 07/10/2011 01:48
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Drawing the line between science andpseudo-science. (was Rational Thought)
You forgot the citations to the 'referenced studies' by
Scherb and Voigt. Will they be forthcoming? Of course not. . . .
At 07:40 AM 10/6/2011, you wrote:
>But this was written by the nukes.
>You can find the real truth in the papers themselves, the Whyte
>paper, like Sternglass, peer reviewed. The CERRIE report was not
>peer reviewed. Anyone but Helbig and someone who was seriously
>biased would fail to see the assiociation, and more recently it has
>been confirmed by Hagen Scherb and Chritina Voigt in their sex ratio
>study which was looked at here recently on this discussion group.
>From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Roger Helbig
>Sent: Thu 06/10/2011 12:34
>To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
>Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Drawing the line between science
>andpseudo-science. (was Rational Thought)
> From Document 142 at http://www.cerrie.org/committee_papers
>*Infant Mortality and Radioactive Contamination from Atmospheric Nuclear
>Weapons Testing Fallout and Other Sources*
>In the late 1960s, Sternglass suggested that a decrease in the rate of
>decline in the risk of infant mortality in the USA in 1950 onwards was due
>to exposure to radioactive fallout from atmospheric nuclear weapons testing.
>However, the temporal pattern of the reducing rates of infant mortality
>across five countries does not support this proposition since the
>consistency predicted by the Sternglass hypothesis is notably absent.
>Further, the substantial variation observed in the national rates emphasises
>the importance of background socioeconomic factors in determining the risk
>of infant mortality. In 1992, Whyte demonstrated a significant deviation in
>the steadily decreasing rate of first day neonatal mortality (and, to a
>lesser extent, stillbirth) during 1950-1980 in both England and Wales and
>the USA, although the difference between the baseline rates is noteworthy.
>However, the temporal pattern of this deviation does not match the temporal
>distribution of fallout doses, especially the disappearance of the deviation
>in 1980 when the fallout dose was (and continued to be throughout the 1980s)
>greater than the doses received from fallout during the early 1950s. Infant
>mortality data from two special towns near the Mayak nuclear facility in
>Russia are supposed to support the notion that exposure to radionuclides
>produced by nuclear fission and adsorption increase the risk of death under
>the age of one year. When these data are examined, however, the only
>(marginally) unusual aspect concerns *post*-neonatal infant mortality, and
>this is primarily due to respiratory diseases that are heavily influenced by
>background socioeconomic factors. The importance of background risk factors
>is emphasised by the much higher rate of childhood mortality (especially
>mortality from respiratory diseases in early childhood) in Russia as a whole
>than in the two special towns near Mayak. The data for infant mortality near
>Mayak, therefore, do not support an interpretation of Whyte's findings for
>first day neonatal mortality in England and Wales and the USA in terms of
>fallout radionuclide exposure. Data for infant mortality and stillbirth in
>Seascale near Sellafield show (marginally) significantly reduced rates
>relative to the national average. This is not unexpected given the
>socioeconomic class profile of the population, but it is important to note
>that radioactive contamination of the area has had no perceptible influence
>on these rates. Obstetric outcomes of Seascale births show no adverse effect
>of living in the village. Stillbirth rates in the general vicinity of
>Sellafield show no relationship with either distance from the site or
>distance from the coast. In summary, the epidemiological evidence for a
>discernible impact of radionuclides from fallout or discharges from nuclear
>reprocessing plants upon the risk of perinatal mortality is unpersuasive -
>there is no consistent pattern across the available datasets
>On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 1:51 AM, Busby, Chris <C.Busby at ulster.ac.uk> wrote:
> > Nevertheless, Sternglass work was followed up much later with more data by
> > Whyte and published in the prestigious British Medical Journal a
> paper which
> > vindicated his findings:
> > Whyte R K, (1992) First Day Neonatal Mortality since 1935: A Re-examination
> > of the Cross Hypothesis, British Medical Journal, 304: 343-6.
> > Sincerely
> > Chris Busby
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: http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
More information about the RadSafe