[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Cohen's Fallacy

To: healthrad@HOTMAIL.COM, radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: Cohen's Fallacy
From: RuthWeiner@AOL.COM
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 16:11:17 EST
Reply-To: RuthWeiner@AOL.COM
Sender: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

In a message dated 1/27/02 10:22:58 AM Mountain Standard Time, healthrad@HOTMAIL.COM writes:

smoking status and residential radon are uncorrelated within each
county (which seems unlikely),

Now maybe I am stupid, but what these authors seem to be saying is that residential radon and smoking status are correlated; e.g., higher radon levels occur in houses where there are smokers. Did they mean to say that the EFFECT of smoking and residential radon are synergistic? Or did they really mean what they said, which can only be interpreted that smokers get some radon exposure from smoking?

Given the imprecision of the language, I am not sure what conclusions can be drawn.

Ruth Weiner, Ph. D.
ruthweiner@aol.com

Prev by Date: Re: Recommendation to resolve Cohen's ecologic study questions
Next by Date: Re: Spatial Radon Variation
Prev by thread: Re: Cohen's Fallacy
Next by thread: Re: Cohen's Fallacy
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread