[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Sampling using summary data
Perhaps this seemingly endless series of challenges being
issued by Mr. Hinks could be brought to an expedient conclusion
if he states specifically at this time both what objective evidence
would convince him and what objective evidence would fail to
convince him.
Also, RADSAFE likely could better address the inquiries of
Mr. Hinks if he would extend the professional courtesy of
identifying his professional affiliation. Perhaps we should ask.
If he has already done so, please excuse me.
**************************************************
Steve Frey,
Radiological Control Manager
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC)
Room 266, Building 24, MS 84
2575 Sand Hill Road
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (650) 926-3839
email: Sfreyohp@SLAC.Stanford.EDU
Any opinion expressed here is mine alone
and not meant to speak on behalf of SLAC.
**************************************************
-----Original Message-----
From: Harry Hinks [mailto:harryhinks@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 9:41 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: Sampling using summay data
Prof. Cohen,
I thought there were differences between the states in the correlations you
spoke of below? In addition, weren't there correlations with other cancers
other than lung? That doesn't make much sense for radon, it may for
smoking.
If you were starting out fresh now and your measurments were not a result of
sales to people interested in their health or radon, how would you sample
(number and sampling scheme) to get a set of data that could be used for
risk analysis?
A more important data set may be the smoking data since this is the major
cause of lung cancer. How well does your smoking data predict the lung
cancers?
Harry Hinks
harryhinks@hotmail.com
>From: Bernard L Cohen <blc+@pitt.edu>
>Reply-To: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
>To: Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
>Subject: Re: Sampling using summay data
>Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 10:44:42 -0600 (CST)
>
> The justification for my data base on average radon levels in U.S.
>counties is very lengthy. I can give references to my papers in which it
>is discussed. It doesn't depend on any one set of measurements, like the
>EPA's. The convincing thing to me is that all measurement sets had good
>correlations, and each used independently gives the same results vs lung
>cancer rates.
>
>Bernard L. Cohen
>Physics Dept.
>University of Pittsburgh
>Pittsburgh, PA 15260
>Tel: (412)624-9245
>Fax: (412)624-9163
>e-mail: blc+@pitt.edu
>
>
>On Sun, 25 Feb 2001, Harry Hinks wrote:
>
> > Prof. Cohen,
> >
> > Does agreement with the EPA and other surveys that peformed limited
>testing
> > per county justify using summary data for risk analysis (or to test the
> > LNT)? THE EPA reports said that their surveys were just an indicator of
> > where elevated radon levels may occur.
> >
> > Harry
> >
> > harryhinks@hotmail.com
> >
> >
> > >From: Bernard L Cohen <blc+@pitt.edu>
> > >Reply-To: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
> > >To: Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
> > >Subject: Re: Sampling using summay data
> > >Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 19:28:24 -0600 (CST)
> > >
> > >On Fri, 23 Feb 2001, Harry Hinks wrote:
> > >
> > > > It is in the math. I didn't realize Prof. Cohen performed
>statistical
> > > > sampling when choosing which house to test in a given area? I
>thought
> > >the
> > > > data set came from individuals who wanted to test for radon becasue
>of
> > > > health concerns or thought they may be living in a high radon area.
>I
> > >wonder
> > > > if people who have increased concern about their health would have
>lower
> > > > cancer rates?
> > >
> > > -Several pages of my papers deal with the issue of justifying my
> > >average radon levels in various counties. I can give references if
> > >desired.
> > >Basically they deal with correlations between results from various
>studies
> > >done by different state agencies, EPA, and careful random selection
> > >studies done by my group, and my entire file of measurements filtered
>for
> > >elimination of the type of bias you suggest.
> > >I was really shocked to find how close these correlations were, and
>that
> > >is what made me go on with this study.
> > >
> >
> >************************************************************************
> > >The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> > >information can be accessed at
>http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.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
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.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