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

Re: Award offer



Wes, et al,
    To me, your assessment of Puskin's paper seems too kind. Puskin's "analysis" appears to be little more than a slick attempt to obfuscate its fundamental lack of logic.
    When you cut through all the crap, to buy his conclusions you have to accept the notion that  radon levels somehow affect smoking habits. I have a bridge I'd like to sell to anyone who finds that  plausible.     Jerry
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Wesley
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2003 7:26 AM
Subject: RE: Award offer

To Bill Field and Radsafe,

 

Dr. Puskin has contributed an interesting and valuable paper addressing “Cohen’s discrepancy,” i.e., Cohen’s negative county level association between radon and lung cancer. Puskin shows that respiratory system cancers correlate negatively with radon, but other cancers do not. He then assumes that this is due to smoking (i.e., the smoke causes respiratory system cancers but not other cancers). He then implies that, for some reason, radon is higher in counties where smoking is lower. He offers no data demonstrating why this would be so.

 

I can think of no reason why radon would be robustly and consistently higher in counties where smoking is lower. To me, this is an implausible association.

 

Bill Field’s implication that Dr. Puskin has explained Dr. Cohen’s discrepancy and deserves the award is premature.

 

Best regards,

Wes

Wesley R. Van Pelt, PhD, CIH, CHP

Wesley R. Van Pelt Associates, Inc.

http://home.att.net/~wesvanpelt/Radiation.html

wesvanpelt@att.net

 

 

> Carl,

>

> Since Dr. Puskin is a federal employee, he likely can not accept a reward

> offer.  However, a donation to the American Cancer Society could be made

> in

> his name.

>

> Regards, Bill Field

> epirad@mchsi.com