RE: Cancer deficiency clusters

["Philippe Duport" <pduport@uottawa.ca>]

One more detail:



The age distribution and year of entry in the workforce; socio-economic

status, ethnicity, medical coverage, etc. are similar in nuclear (NW)

and non-nuclear workers (NNW):  Comparison between the two groups is

legitimate.  The odds ratio for all cancers (NW vs NNW) is 0.82 (95%

confidence interval = 0.74 - 0.90).  OR in NW (0.82) is between 4 and 5

sd below OR 1.



Philippe Duport



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

From: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

[mailto:owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu] On Behalf Of

hflong@postoffice.pacbell.net

Sent: July 19, 2002 7:03 AM

To: jjcohen

Cc: Gibbs, S Julian; Jacobus, John (OD/ORS); Radsafe Mail list

Subject: Re: Cancer deficiency clusters



Yes, Jerry,

Such a study has been done on 27,872 nuclear shipyard workers - but

until

recently only reported as not showing expected increase in cancer.



John Cameron, one of 8 members of the technical advisory committee of

the

Nuclear Shipyard Workers Study reports, "The cancer death rate of the

NW>0.5

group [those receiving an extra 0.5 rem] was over 4 std.dev. lower than

the

NNW control group [non-nuclear workers of similar ages and jobs]. This

good

news is not mentioned but the data are available in the final report."

http://www.aps.org/units/fps/oct01/a5oct01.html



Howard Long



jjcohen wrote:



> I am not an epidemiologist, so perhaps someone else might shed some

> light on this question.-- Suppose a community were found to

> have a cancer incidence significantly below statistical expectation.

> Certainly such communities must exist, perhaps even near nuclear power

> plants.

> What are the chances that one might obtain funding to investigate

probable

> causes for  cancer deficiency? Has such  study ever been done?

>

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: Gibbs, S Julian <s.julian.gibbs@vanderbilt.edu>

> To: Jacobus, John (OD/ORS) <jacobusj@ors.od.nih.gov>; Radsafe Mail

list

> <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

> Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 9:40 AM

> Subject: RE: Cancer clusters

>

> > Unfortunately it is not just this issue that provides studies for

> > epidemiologists (Note I did not say income; most are salaried and

> > get their money anyway.)  The multitudes of associations reported

> > in the scientific literature and the lay press (e.g., eating peas

> > of color x causes or prevents cancer in organ y).  Most of these

> > studies use an alpha of 0.05.  That says that 5% of the studies are

> > false positives!

> > Note: I am not a statistician, but am aware of how one can distort

> > the truth (I did not say lie) with statistics.

>

>

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

> 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/