Re: We are killing nuclear workers!

["Ted Rockwell" <tedrock@cpcug.org>]

>the badged workers had lower mortality rates for most of the
radiation-induced diseases looked at than the unbadged workers.

Thanks, Susan:

The key point is, that for any set of epidemiological data, when you break
it into smaller and smaller sub-sets (by age, type of cancer, etc.) you will
get some sub-sets that show a positive effect, and some that show a negative
effect.  Wing, et al. get many, many sub-sets that "show that radiation is
protective," i.e. the cancer rate is lower.  They ignore these, and seize on
the few that show harm.  The laws of statistics say that you will get such
answers, even if there is no effect of the variable whatsoever.

It's simply junk science, and as the papers reported, these studies are not
new, they are ones "previously dismissed by the government."  They were
dismissed because they were fraudulently misinterpreted.

Happy New Year to you, too!

Ted Rockwell

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