Re: A dose of reality, continued

["Michael S Ford" <MFORD@pantex.com>]

Eric,

The short answer to your query is:  very little if any correction was done.  That's why the data is problematic.
v/r
Michael
mford@pantex.com

>>> denison.8@osu.edu wrote on 03 Apr 00 12:00:12 AM >>>
Patricia M. Sullivan wrote: ....

We should all be able to give an example of this right away.  If my
recollection is correct, the U.S. EPA used data generated primarily by
studies of Czech uranium miners to determine acceptable levels of radon in
American homes.  I've seen the conditions under which some of the coal
miners in this country live and work, and I don't imagine that the Czech
U-miners were/are much better off.  For the data to be anywhere near
applicable to the average American household, it would have to be corrected
for total inhaled particulates, smoking, alcohol consumption, diet,
availability of medical care, ethnic/genetic predispositions, average
lifespan, etc.  Don't know if or how the EPA did this, but with an action
level of 4 pCi/l, I'm guessing that they didn't do much of it.


J. Eric Denison
Nuclear Engineering Program
The Ohio State University
2030 Robinson Laboratory
206 West 18th Avenue
Columbus OH 43210
(614) 292-3681 or -1074
denison.8@osu.edu 


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

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