Re: Radon, smoking and LNT

[John Jacobus <crispy_bird@YAHOO.COM>]

I am surprised you asked this question.  Or may be not

too surprised.  



If you use data that may not represent the situation,

then how can you draw a conclusion that proves or

disproves a hypothesis?  Dr. Cohen is a physicist.  He

has presented data and a conclusion.  Epidemiologists

have reviewed the inforamtion and questioned the

validity of the data.  This is what epidemiologist do.

 I respect those who have training and skills that I

do not, and make an effort to understand what is being

presented.  If my assumptions are wrong, I accept

that.



If you believe what Dr. Cohen shows dispite the

questions raised by the epidemiologist, why bother

collectiing data?  Why bother doing any analysis or

testing?  Again, the argument is about the data.



--- Jerry Cohen <jjcohen@prodigy.net> wrote:

> John,

>     By what criteria should the badness or goodness

> of data be judged?

> I am reminded of the old adage, "A theory is

> something that nobody

> believes except the person who developed it, while

> data is something

> that everybody believes except the person who

> obtained it."

>     With LNT, we seem to have the reverse situation.

> 

> 

. . .



=====

-- 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/