RE: Risks of low level radiation - New Scientist Article

["Jacobus, John (OD/ORS)" <jacobusj@ors.od.nih.gov>]

Otto,

Could it be possible that no relationships exists at the levels being

studied?  



No.  I am not a statistician.



-- John 

John Jacobus, MS

Certified Health Physicist 

3050 Traymore Lane

Bowie, MD  20715-2024



E-mail:  jenday1@email.msn.com (H)      



-----Original Message-----

From: Otto G. Raabe [mailto:ograabe@UCDAVIS.EDU]

Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 1:44 PM

To: Muckerheide; Jim Nelson; jim.dukelow@PNL.GOV; hflong@pacbell.net

Cc: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Subject: Re: Risks of low level radiation - New Scientist Article



. . .

With highest regard for my friends Joe and Fritz, I must say that I tend to

agree with Lubin's mathematical analysis that shows that it is

theoretically possible that the non-LNT slope observed by Prof. Cohen may

be in error without limit as a result of some unknown cross-level

confounding relationship. No whole-set ecological study will uncover such a

factor if it exists. But I believe that it is unlikely, and no one has been

able to identify a plausible cross-level confounding relationship. I

believe that Prof. Cohen agrees with this assessment.

. . .

************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.