Re: Healthy Worker Effect

[Muckerheide <muckerheide@mediaone.net>]

"Tony Harrison" <laharris@smtpgate.dphe.state.co.us> wrote:

> Just to clarify, the healthy worker effect was not invented to debunk
> hormesis, but is seen in epidemiological studies considering all sorts of
> exposures.  

Of course!?  See e.g.,
http://romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/lwgate/RADSAFE/archives/radsafe0101/Auth
or/article-126.html

But it is intentionally misapplied in order to "debunk" hormesis. See,
e.g.,:
http://cnts.wpi.edu/RSH/Docs/Correspondence/DOE-GAO-WPost%20letters/GAO_Repo
rt-DOE_Misrepresents_NSWS.htm

(in this case DOE misuses HWE for a worker/worker comparison!)

HWE is also misused to ignore large reductions (e.g. ~0.6) where an HWE
would be small (e.g., 0.9), if it were justified at all.  Remember, for
workers in carcinogenic environments, the HWE is overwhelmed by the
carcinogenic effect, and cancers are 1.1+ vs. the general population.
<cut>
> Tony Harrison, RSO, MSPH
> Colorado Dept. of Public Health & Environment
> Laboratory and Radiation Services Division
> (303)692-3046
> tony.harrison@state.co.us

Les,

OK :-)  Our "public statement," we'll produce a letter (to the new
administration) about DOE's misrepresentation :-)   We have a few
responders.  Thanks.  Will anyone else concur?
See, e.g.:
http://cnts.wpi.edu/RSH/Docs/Correspondence/DOE-GAO-WPost%20letters/rsh_2-1-
00_ltr_to_sec.htm

and
http://cnts.wpi.edu/RSH/Docs/Correspondence/DOE-GAO-WPost%20letters/rsh_4-8-
00_ltr_2_DOE_IG.htm

(A Nov allegation to the GAO Fraud Unit on DOE's failure to respond is in
process.  Their first stage is to get a response from the affected agency
IGs.)

Thanks.  Regards, Jim
muckerheide@mediaone.net
=======================
   
>>>> laldrich@gte.net 01/09/01 09:32PM >>>
> Jim Muckerheide wrote, in part,
> 
> "Les, IF you are willing to say we are not killing anyone, would you be
> willing to say it in public?  Others?"
> 
> 
> Jim,
> 
> That's funny.  I thought I just did say it in public.  I'm certainly willing
> to say that, based on all the reports I've read concerning radiation effects
> and my 34 years of health physics experience, it is my belief no worker in
> any nuclear facility in the United States, past or present, has ever been
> killed, injured, or seriously inconvenienced by radiation except as a direct
> result of an accident at the facility.
> 
> It is also my opinion that, in an attempt to explain away hormesis,
> researchers who started with a preconceived idea that radiation at low
> levels is harmful invented a thing called the "healthy worker effect" and,
> in fact, the workers are healthier because of their exposure to low levels
> of radiation.
> 
> I have expressed my belief that nuclear power and nuclear facilities are
> safe places to work (in the early days of my career) in presentations to
> junior high and high school classes, in public meetings on nuclear power,
> and to anyone who would listen.  Unfortunately, others get all the press
> with their fear tactics and misinformation campaigns.
> 
> Note that I wrote this from home so there's no question that this is only my
> opinion.
> 
> Les Aldrich
> laldrich@gte.net

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