Re: Re: wrong ruth

[BERNARD L COHEN <blc+@PITT.EDU>]

On Mon, 7 Jan 2002, John Williams wrote:



> I think that is the problem.  There just isn't really good county

> data on smoking prevalence.  Especially from 30 years ago which would

> have been the appropriate data for Cohen to use.  I have been told

> the BRFS collects summary data on that.



	--That cannot be the problem because even if there were a perfect

negative correlation between radon and smoking prevalence, that would not

change my results. Why don't you read my papers? (They are on my web site)





>

> The question also remains about why the strong inverse association

> between county smoking rates and county radon levels?



	--Why is this relevant? If you don't accept that strong negative

correlation, the discrepancy with LNT would be worse than what I report.



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

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/