Re: Radon - recent articles supporting risk at residential exposures

[Ruth Sponsler <jk5554@YAHOO.COM>]

Yes, slightly humorous.  :-)



Well, I'm glad that Samet has apparently changed sides

now, because if one were to use _both_ the radon and

particulate epidemiological studies, you would have a

societal implication unfavorable to particulates, but

favorable to http://www.nei.org/ whose site has a blue

sky as their website background for somewhat obvious

reasons ;-)











--- John Williams <JohnWi@law.com> wrote:

> My major interest in Epidemiology is not radon, but

> rather smoking 

> and lung cancer.  I focus on radon on this listserv

> since it has  a 

> focus on radiation, not particulates.  Most of the

> particulate 

> studies including Samet's are ecologic in nature. 

> In fact, Samet has 

> been criticized for urging people not to use

> ecologic studies for 

> radon and then he uses them for particulates. At

> least, Lubin and 

> Field are consistent with their criticism of

> ecologic studies.

> 

>

see:http://www.junkscience.com/news/samet-air-pollution.html





__________________________________________________

Do You Yahoo!?

Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!

http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/

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

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/