Re: Deaths from radon in U.S.

[RuthWeiner@AOL.COM]

Now, admittedly, I have not read the BEIR VI Executive Summary carefully, and it has the weaknesses of all executive summaries, but I gleaned the following points:


1.  The only direct epidemiologiucal study it is based on is an extensive study of miners.

2.  The miner data is supplemented by animal exposure data.

3.  Other human epidemiological data is from a "meta-analysis" of eight studies loosely described as having included smokers and non-smokers.

4.  The synergism between smoking and MINERS' radon exposure is acknowledged.

5.  (I saved this for last!)  The model uses (and here I quote) "a linear extrapolation from high doses to low doses."


So maybe the resulting model predicts 18,600 cancer deaths.  I would imagine it has at least the average strengths and weaknesses of any model, the main weakness being extrapolation (I am biting my keyboard to keep from writing what I really would like to call this).  maybe it doesn't even include wishful thinking.  However, such a model prediction is a very different thing from the flat statement that "18,600 cancer deaths are due to radon."


"Science is wonderful.  It yields a huge return of conjecture for a tiny investment of fact."  --- Mark Twain


Ruth Weiner, Ph. D.

ruthweiner@aol.com