[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Ship Yard Workers - John Boice
From: hflong@postoffice.pacbell.net
> John,
> I have given time to study hormesis, which say you will not. You admonish me
> to review authority (NCRP 136) rather than review data critically, as I asked
> of you. Which is science?
Howard,
I would note also that the NCRP "authority" is devoid of medical and biology
content. The "evidence" is that of "physicists" seeing "hits" of a cell,
DNA, etc. with a projectile. Such "biophysics" displaces the reality of
biology and medicine, esp pharmacology, failing to see the actual response
of an "immunologically whole" organism to a stressor. The in vivo
literature, and even in vitro, shows a different picture which is simply
discarded by the NCRP establishment.
OTOH, it's not that "old science" is just being challenged by "new science"
in Thomas Kuhn's terms, because the establishment is clearly having to go so
far to suppress data and research, which shows that they know precisely the
results that the biology literature demonstrates conclusively, but must be
suppressed on behalf of their funding agencies.
> The 12, one SD bars of Cohen show very smooth trend, with consistent 10% - 20%
> less lung cancer mortality at 1 -5 pCi/l than with less radon. That is quite
> unlike Iowa outlier data, with small numbers.
>
> The good news is that Ramsar 200msv/yr background giving radiation resistant
> lymphocytes, other new studies and autopsy of old ones (Shipyard Workers),
> revitalizes interest in HPs becoming therapists: pre-surgical, post accident,
> ICU, cancer "vaccination", etc.We should have controlled experiments soon.
This is especially true, though even without being "therapists" the rad
protectionists would become involved in "optimizing" exposures rather than
mindless "minimizing" doses to pursue funds (more like med physicists). They
would become much more valuable to thier organizations (which would greatly
expand the more economical use of radiation in many applications in addition
to human exposures) and professional in their positions, with a path to the
top of many organizations rather than the "traffic cops" who will never
become the Chief or the Mayor! :-)
> Happy Holiday!
And to you!
Regards, Jim
> Howard Long
>
>
> "Jacobus, John (OD/ORS)" wrote:
>
>> Howard,
>> I really don't have the time to devote to the subject of hormesis. I think
>> if you start to look at the error bars, you will see the purported benefits
>> are not very different from no affect. I think if you read NCRP 136 with an
>> open mind, you might questioning the hormesis data shows.
>>
>> -- John
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: hflong@postoffice.pacbell.net
>> [mailto:hflong@postoffice.pacbell.net]
>> Sent: Friday, December 28, 2001 12:39 PM
>> To: Jacobus, John (OD/ORS); radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu
>> Subject: Re: Ship Yard Workers - John Boice
>>
>> John,
>> Pollycove presented Biologic and Epidemiologic Foundations of Radiation
>> Hormesis
>> at our Doctors for Disaster Preparedness meeting July 14, in great detail
>> that
>> confirms the shoter wave lengths as being as "essential" as those in
>> sunlight to
>> good health, better when double to 100 x the current USA gulfcoast exposure.
>> You
>> can get the videotapetape showing slides from jersnav@mindspring.com
>>
>> Muckerheide gave political description at our 2000 meeting. An audiotape of
>> that
>> could answer your political question.
>>
>> Happy Holidays
>>
>> Howard Long
>>
>> "Jacobus, John (OD/ORS)" wrote:
>>
>>> Howard,
>>> While Dr. Cameron was a member of the TAP, he really does not give a good
>>> explanation of why the report was not published in the literature.
>> However,
>>> it is available for review as a DOE report.
>>>
>>> I am sorry, but I do not buy the idea that ionizing radiation is an
>>> essential energy. At the levels we are considering, I doubt effects could
>>> be differentiated from random biological variability.
>>>
>>> -- John
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: hflong@postoffice.pacbell.net
>>> [mailto:hflong@postoffice.pacbell.net]
>>> Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 7:22 PM
>>> To: Jacobus, John (OD/ORS)
>>> Cc: Muckerheide; John Williams; hflong@pacbell.net; radsafe
>>> Subject: Re: Ship Yard Workers - John Boice
>>>
>>> John,
>>> NSWS was NOT published promptly or in full or in scientific objectivity
>>> -according to John Cameron, a member of its Technial Advisory Panel
>>> <http://www.aps.org/units/fps/oct01/a5oct01.html>
>>>
>>> Howard Long
>>>
>>> "Jacobus, John (OD/ORS)" wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jim,
>>>> As you probably know, or refuse to acknowledge, the Nuclear Shipyard
>>> Worker
>>>> Study was published as DOE/EV/10095-T2, "Health Effects of Low-Level
>>>> Radiation in Shipyard Workers, Final Report." I do not argue against
>>> claims
>>>> made by you or others about its results or analysis, (I am not a
>>>> statistician or epidemiologist), but I do object to the false claim that
>>> it
>>>> was never published.
>>>>
>>>> These accusations are similar to your false claims that research is not
>>>> funded for studies of "hormesis," when you post findings on your Web
>> site.
>>>>
>>>> -- John
>>>> John Jacobus, MS
>>>> Certified Health Physicist
>>>> 3050 Traymore Lane
>>>> Bowie, MD 20715-2024
>>>>
>>>> E-mail: jenday1@email.msn.com (H)
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Muckerheide [mailto:muckerheide@MEDIAONE.NET]
>>>> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 7:12 PM
>>>> To: John Williams; hflong@pacbell.net
>>>> Cc: radsafe
>>>> Subject: Re: Ship Yard Workers - John Boice
>>>>
>>>> . . .
>>>> (continuing Matanoski
>>>> funds for the Shipyard Worker study in '94 to leave as Chair, but never
>>>> publish the study.)
>>>> . . .
>
> ************************************************************************
> 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. You
> can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/
>
************************************************************************
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. You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/