Re: Radon and Lung Cancer: What the studies really say.

[BERNARD L COHEN <blc+@PITT.EDU>]

On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 epirad@mchsi.com wrote:



> Unfortunately the treatment described uses the same problematic smoking data

> that does a poor job of predicting county lung cancer rates.



	--The smoking data I use does an excellent job of predicting

county lung cancer rates; it implies that all lung cancer is due to

smoking; see section on "Defense of PITT S-values" in Item #15 on my web

site. Your statement is based on its failure to do an excellent job in

predicting all the small random fluctuations in smoking and lung cancer

rates; this was explained in my paper in Health Physics 72:489-490;1997



	--I have shown that no remotely plausible smoking prevalence data

can explain the discrepancy between my data and LNT. See Sec. 4.2 of Item

#7 on my web site.



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

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/