[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: alpha particles and lung cancer
Chris,
Some of your answers regarding Saxony are presented by Dr. Becker at:
http://cnts.wpi.edu/rsh/Docs/RSHSympNov00/Becker.htm
see also a presentation paper at our 1999 Tokyo Symposium:
http://cnts.wpi.edu/rsh/Docs/ICONE7-Tokyo99/KB99-tokyo.html
This is the typical case of substantial work being ignored, especially work
by Schuettmann, Conrady, and others, while, like in the US, $ millions of
gov't/rad protection "research" funds are being dropped on establishment
people to obfuscate the data - Wichmann et al.
Note also that Bernie Cohen's data have been independently confirmed based
on an entirely different analysis by Ken Bogen at LBL. Women lung cancer
mortality 1950-54 (60-80 yr old 4% smoking, 40-80 yr old, 11% smoking), vs.
EPA by-county environmental radon data (not residential measurements). See
the first 2 paragraphs of the "Methods and Materials" section, and Figure 2a
to see the data plotted:
http://www.belleonline.com/n3v72.html
Thanks.
Regards, Jim
muckerheide@mediaone.net
==========================
> Dear Prof Cohen, Radsafers,
> I think I dare say you have many more admirers than detractors (more
> vociferous) of your seminal work on indoor radon at relatively low
> concentrations up to 240 Bq/m^3 (granted, on average). Individually, this
> would be an 'acceptable' level in most countries. National individual
> 'limits' vary typically between 200 and 400 Bq/m^3 for domestic buildings,
> above which some form of remediation is 'recommended'. As you might know,
> some of the criticism levelled against your approach is based on the fact
> that a few isolated high maximum radon concentrations would not necessarily
> reflect in the county average (Implication: high outliers could conceivably
> be responsible for the lung cancer deaths) . This as an aside, to explain
> (in part) why I see the study of high concentrations as relevant.
> My expectation is that a proper assessment in e.g. Saxony, Germany, could
> be a valuable complement towards understanding the effects of high domestic
> radon concentrations, especially since long-term measurements have been
> done, and in certain towns about 20% of the houses were reported in excess
> of 15000 Bq/m^3. An advantage is that in Germany a register of residence
> is kept. Most of these houses have probably been occupied for many
> decades, mostly by the same families (low migration). Health records
> should also be relatively complete, so that individual health histories can
> be correlated with actual living conditions (pre-remediation). On the face
> of it, this represents an outstanding opportunity to answer some burning
> questions about radon, carcenogenicity, hormesis, and more.
> Chris Hofmeyr
> chofmeyr@nnr.co.za
>
> Your message:
>
> Bernard L Cohen <blc+@pitt.edu>
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Sent by: <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
> radsafe@romulus.eh cc: (bcc: Christoph Hofmeyr/CNS1)
> s.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: alpha particles and lung cancer
>
> 2001/02/21 18:44
> Please respond to
> radsafe
>
> On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Christoph Hofmeyr wrote:
>>
>> In a posting of 9 Feb I queried about studies of inhabitants of high radon
>> dwellings in e.g. Saxony (significant numbers >15000 Bq/m^3), as residential
>> and other records are usually very complete in Germany. I felt that a proper
>> survey under such conditions should be a good measure of the danger of
>> domestic radon (in reality the progeny); it could be a seminal study. To be
>> honest, I am baffled that such a study has not had a high profile,
>> considering worldwide radon 'remediation' efforts.
>
> --How about my study of U.S. counties, published originally in
> Health Physics 68:157-174; 1995, with many follow-up papers?
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html