Re: LNT, Collective Dose

["Jerry Cohen" <jjcohen@prodigy.net>]

Fritz,
    Your point is well taken, but the argument depends of the definitions
applied, i.e. threshold for what?? The fact that at some low level of dose,
positive effects may occur does not preclude the possibility that negative
effects (albeit of a different nature) could simultaneously be occurring. In
the regulatory/political bureaucracy, the focus is on avoiding harmful
effects. Positive effects. if any,  are essentially irrelevant, so the
question remains-- What could possibly constitute "scientific evidence" that
harmful effects are absent.
    How else can you explain the refusal by official agencies to reflect the
works of Bernie Cohen and a multitude of other scientists in setting
radiation protection policy?

Jerry


----- Original Message -----
From: Fritz A. Seiler <faseiler@nmia.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 5:08 PM
Subject: Re: LNT, Collective Dose


> Hi all,
>
> Jerry Cohen wrote:
>
> > -- I sure don't want to hurt EPA's feelings :-), but the above statement
is
> > total nonsense. There is no way to prove a threshold. Logically, it is
> > impossible to prove any negative.
>
> This statement is true only if the excess risk is positive semi-definite!
( R
> >=  0)!
> You can demonstrate a threshold if the excess risk goes to negative values
> below the threshold!  It occurs when you have hormesis as in Bernie
> Cohen's radon measurements and when you don't re-normalize the
> Japanese bomb survivor data by setting the leukemia mortality ratio
> (about 0.7 for the lowest dose group) equal to a relative risk of 1!
> Equating a mortality ratio at zero dose, which is not equal to one with
> a relative risk which is one means bringing in the LNT by the back
> door!!  For numerical data and logical arguments, see:
>
> Alvarez, J.L., and F.A. Seiler, "New Approaches to Low-Dose Risk
> Modeling," Technology: Journal of the Franklin Institute, 333A, 33-51,
> 1996.
>
> Cohen, B.L.  Test of the linear-no threshold theory of radiation
> carcinogenesis for inhaled Radon decay products. Health Phys. 68:
> 157-174; 1995.
>
> Cohen, B.L. Validity of the Linear-No Threshold of Radiation
> Carcinogenesis in the Low Dose Region. Technology: Journal
> Franklin Institute 6, 43-61 (1999).
>
> Seiler, F.A., and J.L. Alvarez, "Is the 'Ecological Fallacy' a Fallacy?"
> Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 6, 921-941, 2000.
>
> As Joe Alvarez and I have to remind even ourselves every once and
> so often: " This is an argument based on LNT thinking! (which seems
> to pervade most low-dose arguments!)"
>
> Have a nice weekend anyway,
>
> Fritz
>
> --
>
>  " The American Republic will endure until the day Congress
>  discovers that it can bribe the Public with the Public's money."
>                                        Alexis de Tocqueville
>                                        Democracy in America
>
> ***************************
>
> Fritz A. Seiler, Ph.D.
> Sigma Five Consulting
> P.O. Box 1709
> Los Lunas, NM 87031, USA
> Tel.    505-866-5193
> Fax.    505-866-5197
> e-mail: faseiler@nmia.com
>
> ***************************
>
>
> ************************************************************************
> 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