Re: lung cancers, primary vs secondary

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

On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 epirad@mchsi.com wrote:



> The accuracy of death certificate information regarding primary versus

> secondary lung cancer is always suspect unless additional information is

> available to confirm the information on the death certificate. The greatest

> inaccuracy likely occurs in misdiagnosed primary lung cancer in non smoking

> females.  The lung cancer may often be a secondary cancer from a hidden cancer

> from elsewhere else in the body such as the breast.



	--Why is this not a problem for cancer incidence which you say is

more reliable and for which autopsies are never possible?

>

> More to the point, we have conclusively shown that the mortality data used by

> Dr. Cohen is temporally incorrect in relation to the latency period for cancers

> and radon testing periods in Dr. Cohen's data.



	--I have responded to this before, quite recently. If anyone wants

a repeat, please ask.



 Actual incidence lung cancer

> data from a National Cancer Institute Cancer Registry is in very poor agreement

> with Dr. Cohen's surrogate data for the time period of interest.



	--What do you mean by surrogate? Why don't you specify that the

issue is incidence vs mortality -- both data are from NCI? What do you

mean by poor agreement? What is the evidence that this is correlated with

radon levels on a national scale?







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

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/