Re: Confederate States

["Richard L. Hess" <lists@richardhess.com>]

Presumably if we look at this data in smaller subsets, the number of points 

straying far from the norm would still be small.



Is there a state-by-state breakdown of the data in any of the publications?



I would be curious (for reasons similar to Dr. Raabe's) to see state values for

   Alaska, Hawaii, Florida, Arizona, California, Colorado, Oregon, Maine, 

Maryland, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Washington (state)



I wouldn't mind having the data, but I wouldn't necessarily trust my 

statistical abilities to analyze it.



Cheers,



Richard





At 10:22 AM 5/9/2003 -0700, Otto G. Raabe wrote:

>At 10:09 AM 5/9/03 -0400, BERNARD L COHEN wrote:

> >       Deleting the states you specify reduces the number in the data

> >base from 1601 to 1175. The results for the slope, B, are -7.2+/-0.6 for

> >males and -9.1+/-0.9 for females. These differ very little from my results

> >for all 1601 counties, B=-7.3 for males and B=-8.3 for females, but they

> >are very discrepant from the LNT prediction, B=+7.3

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

>May 9, 2003

>Davis, CA

>

>Dear Bernie:

>

>I am very grateful for your willingness to try this exercise. I thank you.

>

>I did not request this test to renew the Civil War, but only as a

>convenience. When one views the EPA Map of Radon Zones at

>http://www.epa.gov/iaq/radon/zonemap.html it becomes quite obvious that

>lowest radon exposures in the continental U.S. occur, by chance,

>substantially in these "Confederate" States. Also, these States tend to

>have mild climates, so that housing and radon exposure issues may be quite

>different from elsewhere. Since almost all present day lung cancer is cause

>by use of tobacco products, it is interesting that many of these States are

>leaders in production of tobacco crops, and personal observation has been

>that smoking is common in these States. In addition, the high lung cancer

>rates are clustered in these States according to NCI data.

>

>It occurred to me that your results might be skewed by the low radon and

>especially high lung cancer rates that are apparently correlated in these

>States. That is why I suggested doing the analysis with the these States

>excluded. The fact that there is virtually no change shows again the

>robustness of your results. This reduces in my mind the likelihood that

>your results are an artifact of the statistical weaknesses of ecological data.

>

>Sincerely,

>

>Otto

>

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

>Prof. Otto G. Raabe, Ph.D., CHP

>Center for Health & the Environment

>(Street Address: Bldg. 3792, Old Davis Road)

>University of California, Davis, CA 95616

>E-Mail: ograabe@ucdavis.edu

>Phone: (530) 752-7754   FAX: (530) 758-6140

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

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

>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/