[ RadSafe ] New study re: birth defects in Iraq

franz.schoenhofer at chello.at franz.schoenhofer at chello.at
Mon Oct 29 16:46:46 CDT 2012

Mattias, what do you expect from those "studies" from those "experts" like the Raman spectroscopist Busby - did you notice that he was expelled from RADSAFE? One does not need to  be an expert in statistics - whether the error bars are 1, 2 or 3 sigma does not matter for the "real" experts as long as the "results" confirm their preconceived opinions. I have been active as a referee for several well known jounals. I have experienced papers´where even the change of a comma would have been wrong, but others, which should have been discarded from the very beginning.  

Busby and the like are for me the absolute models of unscientific, selfserving and profit making "experts" in this antinuclear  business. 
aI fall det finns svensk sprakiga medlemmar i RADSAFE: Jag skulle gärna ha svenska vetenskapliga papper i omraded stralskydd 
och "environmental radioactivity". 

Jag kan gärna bétala avgivter i gamla öre, jag har forfarande gansa myc

---- Lantzelot <Mattias.Lantz at physics.uu.se> schrieb:
> To me this study is as strange as the earlier ones on the same theme by 
Busby, if not worse. Take a look at the error bars. I am not an expert 
in statistics, but when the statistical errors are as large as (or 
larger than...) the values themselves, then it is difficult to
understand how it is possible to draw any conclusions the way that they do.

Furthermore, it would be nice if anybody with knowledge about 
folate-deficiency related health effects can take a close look at that 
part and give a comment. It seems to be squeezed into the article rather 
bluntly, and is more of an opinion than a firm conclusion based on any 
of the data or the references.

As a side note, the article by Wang et al that is referred to regarding 
the issue with folate-deficiency is not very convincing, they fit lines 
to a set of data points that are all over the place.

It is also noteworthy that the article authors spend 1.5 pages on very 
precise details with the experimental measurement method (ICPMS) but are 
much less careful with how they handle the selected families for the 
study. For an epidemiological case control study it may not be an error 
to have a control group that is much smaller than the group of cases. 
But considering the rest it raises serious doubts, at least with me.

My five cents...

Mattias Lantz

Mattias Lantz - Researcher
ランツ マティアス
Department of Physics and Astronomy
Division of Applied Nuclear Physics
Uppsala University, Box 516
SE - 751 20, Uppsala, Sweden
email:  mattias.lantz at physics.uu.se

On 10/29/2012 08:07 PM, Harrison, Tony wrote:
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3464374/pdf/128_2012_Article_817.pdf
> This appears to be a pretty well designed study.  It's a real problem, but
> it's not the depleted uranium, it's the lead.
> Maybe.

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

Franz Schoenhofer, PhD, MinRat
Habicherg. 31/7
A-1160 Vienna
mobile: ++43 699 1706 1227

More information about the RadSafe mailing list