Re: Re: Radon - recent articles supporting risk at residential exposures

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

Ruth,



I agree that if you use ecologic data to try to examine radon risk 

without individual data on smoking, that indeed is a fishing 

expedition.  When Field examined Cohen's data he found a huge 

p<0.000001 inverse relationship between the county smoking rates and 

radon.  Run the analyses yourself.  If you do not correct for the 

smoking duration, rate, cross level bias, you will be left with 

residual confounding that will give you the impression radon is 

extending lives when in fact what you are seeing is the lower county 

smoking rates extending lives.  Because of the cross-level bias you 

can not make decent adjustments at the aggregate level.   



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. You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/