Re: Re: RE: Re: Source of cancer data

["John Williams" <JohnWi@law.com>]

Dr. Cohen,



Yes, the underlying lung cancer incidence data Smith, Field and Lynch 

(in their Forum article about your work) substituted in with the rest 

of your data is more appropriate and scientifically defensible then 

the mortality data you used.  I think it is up to you to explain 

numerically why they are incorrect.  They used your data and you have 

access to the SEER data they used.  They have already stated their 

case.  You always want others to explain numerically why your 

findings are wrong, then please explain numerically why they are 

wrong.



John Williams





Sent by Law  Mail

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

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.