Re: I'm get tired of it too, but...

[William Prestwich <prestwic@mcmail.cis.McMaster.CA>]

Hi Jim,
	I guess you answered your own question-the Miller data wasn't
suppressed-you have had access to it to criticize it. What you are really
criticizing it seems to me, is the interpretation put on it.
	As regards the poor statistics associated with the study of cases
by individual doctors, this may be true. But the doses are higher than
residential, so the risk estimates from the LNT would be also. In a large
international study, I would have thought the statistics would be better
than say the Hanford study for radiation workers. The feasibility would be
worth examining by say the IAEA.
	I am not sure if my original communication regarding Cohen's data
was misleading. My intent was to indicate that my feeling is that it does
show a valid discrepancy and that it is the responsibility of the entire
community to either specifically explain the result within the LNT or to
consider the hypothesis to be invalid for residentaal levels of radon
exposure. 
	To have a debate requires conflicting opinions. It doesn't
however, require casting aspersions.
	
Bill Prestwich
McMaster University
Hamilton, Ontario.
	


************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html