Re: Fossil fuel and genetic defects

[RuthWeiner@AOL.COM]

Like Otto, I have a lot of problem with this.  We have a pretty good idea of 

the effect ofthe mother's smoking on infants: low birth weight, for one.  If 

cleft palate were caused by air pollution, hundreds more would be caused by 

smoking.



Most airmpollutants have quite well established thresholds of effect, and the 

mindless application of the LNT to air pollutants (which, by the way, gets 

published in journals like RIsk Analysis)  is poor reasoning, poor 

epidemiology, and defies common sense.  It's much like the scares about 

children who grow up in houses heated with wood stoves having decreased lung 

capacity, that made the rounds in the 1980s.



One can correlate almost anything with anything, especially when one of those 

"anythings" is as ubiquitous as air pollution.  And by the way, is there a 

higher birth defect incidence in dusty states like Arizona and New Mexico?  

among farmers?



Let's not jump on bad science just because it is on "our side" of an 

argument.  The LNT is if anything less applicable to air pollutants than to 

ionizing radiation.



Comments, please!



And Merry Christmas!



Ruth



Ruth Weiner, Ph.D.

ruthweiner@aol.com

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

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.