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

RE: Apparent anti-correlations between geographic radiation and cancer are not surprising



Title: RE: Apparent anti-correlations between geographic radiation and cancer are not surprising

I agree that population does not explain the rates in all areas.  I was looking at the counties in North and South Dakota that are coded red.  These counties are extremely rural, and have very low populations (including few white males).  The one factor that they all may share is the lack of health care, and a very impoverished population.


Kaye Larson

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Rees [mailto:brees@LANL.GOV]
Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 11:50 AM
To: Jacobus, John (NIH/OD/ORS); Radsafe Mail list
Subject: RE: Apparent anti-correlations between geographic radiation and
cancer are not surprising


I'm not sure I understand this reasoning, it's a rate map and has very
little to do with population density.  I do agree that people will
gravitate to larger population centers for treatment, but at the resolution
of the map it'd smeared out for the most part.

If anything, I'D like to see this superimposed on a background radiation
level map.

(Obviously)my own opinions

Brian Rees



>First of all, cancers occur naturally in the population.    Ergo, more
>people, more cancers.  More people, more smoking.  More people, more
>drinking. Etc.  The denser the population, as in and around cities, the more
>cancers that will be observed.  These maps are aggregates of all cancers,
>and highly defined are the areas under study?  To me, it is difficult to
>compare a small rual county with a few small towns and a population maybe
>30,000 with the NY brough of Manhattan with 3 million people.  (These
>numbers are probably way off, but I think you get the idea).
>
>What I suggest is that you compare the cancer incident map with a population
>density map.
>
>-- John
>
>John P. Jacobus, MS
>Certified Health Physicist
>e-mail:  jenday1@msn.com
>
>
>Whatever the agent or combination of agents is, it must reproduce this map:
>http://www.dceg.cancer.gov/cgi-bin/atlas/mapview2?direct=acccwm70
>or else it can't be the cause.

************************************************************************
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/