[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Radon, smoking and LNT
Bill, I think the concern is that, whereas there is virtually no scientific
evidence that low-dose radiation (or low-dose anything else)is harmful, and
Cohen's data are fully consistent with the rest of the vast field of
toxicology, you and a few others in the radprot field treat Cohen's data as
an anomaly that must be explained.
The fact is that Cohen's data (and a number of other reports on people in
homes with low radon level, without the confounding problems of mines, etc.)
show what happens to real people in real homes with low-dose radon. To the
extent that other data are inconsistent with it, they are the anomaly to be
explained.
Ted Rockwell
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu
[mailto:owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu]On Behalf Of William V Lipton
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 10:02 AM
To: Johansen, Kjell
Cc: Radsafe (E-mail)
Subject: Re: Radon, smoking and LNT
I'm glad that someone finds this fascinating. Before following this any
further, I suggest that you obtain some basic information. The EPA guide is
available at:
http://www.epa.gov/iaq/radon/pubs/citguide.html
I'm not sure why so many people view LNT as a "religious truth." It is
simply a useful safety tool for deriving adequate standards that are
economically viable. The anti-LNT people seem to have a religious zeal that
is disturbing. One Radsafer compares LNT advocates to the Nazis, while
others call LNT, "criminal."
Oh, well, gotta go. It's time for the scheduled incense burning at our LNT
altar.
The opinions expressed are strictly mine.
It's not about dose, it's about trust.
Curies forever.
Bill Lipton
liptonw@dteenergy.com
"Johansen, Kjell" wrote:
> I am neither a statistician nor an epidemiologist. But, I find this debate
of interest having seen LNT go from a working, conservative hypothesis to be
applied in judgments for addressing radiation safety questions to what, now
in some circles, having taken on the aura of a religious truth. So, if you
don't mind, I've got a couple of thoughts which have crossed my mind while
following this important debate. (I must say that I find this debate going
on at a bit more higher level than the one concerning the formation of
oceanic manganese nodules which raged on from the late 1800s to the
discovery of deep-ocean vents spewing large amounts of Mn into the ocean in
the '70s and 80s. Many mea culpas were offered for the remarks aimed at
those who had proposed such an origin for Mn based on conclusions drawn from
field data before the discovery of these deep ocean vents or "smokers" as
they are called by oceanographers.)
>
> 1. When we refer to radon with regard to lung cancer, are we saying that
it is radon alone that is of concern or are we using it as a surrogate for
radon plus its decay products? (I assume the latter but want to make sure.)
>
> 2. At an HPS annual meeting some years ago (it may have been the late
"80s), someone delivered a paper stating that light amounts of smoking
stimulated the cilia of the air passage thereby providing some benefit for
clearing pollutants from the lungs.
>
> If the answer to #1 above is that radon is short-hand for radon + radon
daughters, and, it is true that light cigarette smoking does facilitate the
removal of pollutants ( in this case think radon daughters attached to air
particulates) perhaps, light cigarette smoking would have a positive benefit
for diminishing radon daughter exposures and may account for the shape of
Bernie Cohen's lung cancer - radon curve.
>
> Kjell Johansen, PhD
> Sr. Chemist-Environmental
> Point Beach Nuclear Plant
> Two Rivers, WI 54241
> kjell.johansen@nmcco.com
> ************************************************************************
> 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/
************************************************************************
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/