RE: Cohen's latest reward

["Jim Muckerheide" <jmuckerheide@cnts.wpi.edu>]

The critics ignore the fact that the point is to identify such a

postulated mechanism.



Of course there can be none, since while such a condition could exist in

a study, Cohen has produced several hundreds of independent studies,

which show consistent results. While there is a conceptual theoretical

"possibility" that such a condition "could" exist, the actual

calculational "probability" is 10 to the minus tens of zeros. 



Imagine that one smaller independent correlation in Bernie's data

produced a positive slope out of 500+ studies, that Lubin, Samet, et

al., would deign to claim that THIS ONE represents the real result!? :-)



Regards, Jim





-----Original Message-----

From:	Kai Kaletsch

Sent:	Wed 16-Jan-02 8:39 PM

To:	Rad health; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Cc:	

Subject:	Re: Cohen's latest reward



Explaining a statistically strong association with "cross level bias and

inter county variability" is like explaining the pollution in a lake

with

"all the dead fish that keep washing up on shore". Both the cross level

bias

and the dead fish are symptoms of some more fundamental mechanism that

needs

to be identified.



Kai Kaletsch



----- Original Message -----

From: "Rad health" <healthrad@HOTMAIL.COM>

To: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 4:48 PM

Subject: Cohen's latest reward





> Dr. Cohen,



>....one of the major factors,

> among others, most likely causing your paradoxical findings is

cross-level

> bias or inter county variability....







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

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/