[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: AARST Radon Scientist Claim Nation's Policy a Failure
> Does anyone beside me think that presenting numbers to three significant
> figures, that vary nearly 100% from lowest to highest, is demonstrating an
> embarrassing lack of scientific numeracy? Particularly since they are
> based on "few experimental studies and essentially no human data," to quote
> NCRP-121.
>
> Ted Rockwell
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu
> [mailto:owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu]On Behalf Of John Jacobus
> Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 1:33 PM
> To: epirad@mchsi.com; Stewart Farber
> Cc: Richard L. Hess; Radsafe
> Subject: Re: AARST Radon Scientist Claim Nation's Policy a Failure
>
> Yes. They do it with most anything now. Instrument read outs to two or
three decimal placements when the result is less than 1 dpm or even minus. They
do it with statistical results even though the parameters used and not used
very and are even in dispute as associated to the observation such as second
hand smoke.
>
>
> epirad@mchsi.com wrote:
>
> Stewart,
>
> BEIR VI's best estimate of the number of lung cancer deaths attributed to
> radon
> in the U.S. each year was 15,400 for the exposure-age-duration model and
> 21,800
> for the exposure-age-concentration model. Many people take the average and
> use
> 18,600. The BEIR VI committee's uncertainty analyses using the constant
> relative risk model suggested that the number of cases could range from
> about
> 3,000 to 33,000. However, the actual 95% upper confidence limit for the
> exposure-age-concentration model was approximately 38,600, but the
> committee
> suggested that such an upper limit was unlikely.
>
>
>
>
> Does anyone besides me think that it would be a good idea for the public to
> be told "the estimated lung cancer risk from radon is 18,600 deaths per
> year, but could range from 3,000 to 33,000 per year?" Do we think the
> public is unable to grasp the idea that the numbers are only calculations
> that involve some significant uncertainties?
>
>
>
> -- John
> John Jacobus, MS
> Certified Health Physicist
> e-mail: crispy_bird@yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
>
---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using MailMan
provided by Good News Internet Services
http://www.goodnews.net/
************************************************************************
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/