RE: Critics Allege Infant Mortality Rate

[Ernesto_Faillace@notes.ymp.gov]

Andrew_Karam@URMC.Rochester.edu wrote:

"So, does anyone know of any celebrities who are either pro-nuclear power or who
at least have an open mind?  Maybe we
should try to contact them!"

A possible candidate is any celebrity that has had to undergo radiation therapy
(or, better yet, has had a child or other loved one that needed the radiation
therapy).
Ernesto Faillace CHP
efaillace@earthlink.net





"Karam, Andrew" <Andrew_Karam@URMC.Rochester.edu> on 04/25/2000 09:46:22 AM

Please respond to radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu

To:   Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
cc:    (bcc: Ernesto Faillace/YM/RWDOE)

Subject:  RE: Critics Allege Infant Mortality Rate




In order for a study to be accepted as epidemiologically sound, it must:

-Show a that the organism (or agent) responsible for a disease must be
present in every case of the disease

-Show that the organism (or agent) must be capable of causing the disease in
a healthy host

-Demonstrate a mechanism of causation for the organism (or agent)to produce
the observed effect.


These are adapted from Koch's postulates of epidemiology in a book "The Dose
Makes the Poison" (Alice Ottoboni, Van Norstrand Reinhold, 1991) and
rephrased by me somewhat to shorten them.  Another postulate states that the
organism or agent must be recovered from an animal with the disease, which
is clearly not possible in this instance.

So, I must ask if these requirements have been met in the cases cited.  To
me, the most significant of these postulates is the third, showing a
mechanism by which almost unmeasureably low levels of radiation or
radioactivity can cause birth defects.

If the science is bad, let's comment on the science.  If people are
reporting bad science, let's comment on the science and consider referring
them to better science.

Finally, we have to live with the fact that a lot of people have wide media
exposure and are more popular than the average health physicist.  My guess
is that Alec Baldwin, Christie Brinkley, et al are doing their best to
address something about which they have a genuine concern.  Unfortunately,
in my opinion, they happen to be wrong, and they have a very visible soap
box.  This does not make them bad people, because they're trying to help.
It just makes them uninformed.  So, does anyone know of any celebrities who
are either pro-nuclear power or who at least have an open mind?  Maybe we
should try to contact them!

Andy

Andrew_Karam@URMC.Rochester.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