RE: Radon, smoking and LNT

[John Jacobus <crispy_bird@YAHOO.COM>]

Ted,

I think that the issue is that the epidemiologist do

not think the data is reliable, and cannot demonstrate

anything.  Whether is proves or disproves the LNT or

the effects of radon, etc., is secondary to the first

issue, which is the reliability of the data.  



I think you and others are so convinced it supports

your view that you are missing the first issue.  Bad

data is bad date.  If the data is bad, it will hurt

your cause.



P.S. Dr. Cohen, please save time by not replying to

this message.





--- Ted Rockwell <tedrock@CPCUG.ORG> wrote:

> 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.

> . . .



=====

-- John

John Jacobus, MS

Certified Health Physicist

e-mail:  crispy_bird@yahoo.com



__________________________________

Do you Yahoo!?

SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!

http://sbc.yahoo.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/