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

RE: Nukes close, infant deaths go down - Tooth Fairy Project - NY Times





I looked at an earlier version of this "research" by Joe Mangano, a protege

of Ernest Sternglass.  It was ideologically-driven data mining of the

shoddiest sort.  Mangano (et al.?) chose "downwind" counties without any

regard for actual wind patterns, choosing some that were upwind and ignoring

downwind counties whose infant mortality data did not conform to the "right"

answer.  The extraodinary thing what that the research was published in a

Springer Press journal.



Revkind's piece was reasonalby balanced, but, as noted, the headline was

over the top.  Interestingly, the NYT story identifies the sponsering

organization and the journal, but does not identify the researchers,

although it does quote Mangano, who it describes as a public health

statistician and national coordinator of the group.



Best regards.



Jim Dukelow

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

Richland, WA

jim.dukelow@pnl.gov



These comments are mine and have not been reviewed and/or approved by my

management or by the U.S. Department of Energy.

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

From: William V Lipton [mailto:liptonw@DTEENERGY.COM]

Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 9:05 AM

To: Norman Cohen

Cc: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Subject: Re: Nukes close, infant deaths go down - Tooth Fairy Project -

NY Times





Unlike some Radsafers, my comments are quite printable, and I hope that they

are

widely printed.



Many thanx for bringing this article to my attention.  When I was growing

up, in

Long Branch, NJ, the NY Times was probably one of the many advantages of

living

in the NYC area.  This is a well written and well balanced article, although

those who don't read beyond the headline may get the wrong impression.



I especially encourage you to look at the work of John Boice, who is quoted,

here.  He is a classmate of mine, is arguably the best contemporary

epidemiologist, and has done a lot of work on this issue.



The opinions expressed are strictly mine.

It's not about dose, it's about trust.

Curies forever.





Bill Lipton

liptonw@dteenergy.com





Norman Cohen wrote:



> mailbox@gsenet.org wrote:

>

> > 020430

> >

> > GARDEN STATE ENVIRONEWS

> >

> > ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

> >

> >                            TABLE OF CONTENTS

> >                            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

> >       {*} NUCLEAR POWER OPPONENTS CITE LINK TO INFANT DEATH RATES

> >

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

> >

> > NUCLEAR POWER OPPONENTS CITE LINK TO INFANT DEATH RATES

> >

> > Date: 30 Apr 2002

> > From: MerBenzRN@aol.com

> >

> > By Andrew C. Revkin, NY Times, April 30, 2002

> >

> >  Antinuclear campaigners plan to announce today that a new study shows

> > that infant death rates downwind of eight American nuclear power

> > plants dropped significantly after they were shut down.

> >

> >  Some plan to use the findings to support calls for closing the

> > nuclear reactors at Indian Point, the plant closest to New York City,

> > in Westchester County.

> >

> >  But federal officials, some radiation experts and representatives of

> > the nuclear power industry said that there was no evidence to link

> > illness and proximity to nuclear plants and that minute, occasional

> > releases from such plants were much lower than natural radiation

> > levels.

> >

> >  The new statistical study, which is being published in the next issue

> > of The Archives of Environmental Health, was conducted by a group of

> > scientists who for many years have purported to show a link between

> > mortality and illness and low levels of radiation from power plants,

> > bomb tests and other sources.

> >

> >  But their past work has never been replicated by federal health

> > researchers, and the statistical analysis they used in some earlier

> > studies has been challenged by the National Cancer Institute.

> >

> >  The study said the infant death rate in communities for two years

> > preceding the plant shutdowns averaged 8.44 deaths per 1,000 births

> > and, when all the mortality data for two years after the plant

> > shutdowns were combined, the infant mortality rate dropped to 7.01 per

> > 1,000 births.

> >

> >  The difference was statistically significant, the authors said, and

> > the drop was greater than the general drop in infant death rates

> > around the country in recent years.

> >

> >  The scientists, from the Radiation and Public Health Project, a

> > nonprofit group, defended their new findings and cited the need for

> > much more research.

> >

> >  Joseph J. Mangano, a public health statistician and the national

> > coordinator for the group, said a statistical link does not prove a

> > cause and effect, but points to the need for more work.

> >

> >  "A lot of things could affect infant deaths," he said. "The list is

> > literally endless. This doesn't mean we've proved anything beyond a

> > shadow of a doubt, but what I will say is we really need to do more

> > follow-up."

> >

> >  Among other things, the study examined statistics from counties and

> > cities downwind of eight nuclear plants that shut down either for a

> > prolonged period or permanently - in Connecticut, Maine,

> > Massachusetts, California, Oregon, Colorado, Michigan and Wisconsin.

> >

> >  Dr. John Boice Jr., who directed a 1991 National Cancer Institute

> > study of disease patterns around nuclear plants and other institutions

> > using radiation, said no link emerged.

> >

> >  "There are so many other important things to worry about in terms of

> > radiation - like what are we doing to do with the waste and the

> > terrorism issue," he said last night.

> >

> > * * *

> >

> > Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company

> >

> > ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

> >

>

> ************************************************************************

> 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/



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

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/

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

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/