Re: The Ultimate Hormesis Paper

["Jerry Cohen" <jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET>]

WOW! Wouldn't this whole fiasco make a dandy episode  for a "60 minutes",

"Dateline" , or some other TV news expose' program. The only problem is that

nobody would believe it. In the real world, a good epidemiological study is

one

that obtains the "right" answer.







----- Original Message -----

From: Muckerheide <muckerheide@comcast.net>

To: Dr. Theodore Rockwell <tedrock@cpcug.org>;

<radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>; Dr. Otto Raabe <ograabe@UCDAVIS.EDU>;

<rad-sci-l@WPI.EDU>

Cc: Jim Muckerheide <jmuckerheide@cnts.wpi.edu>

Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 10:00 PM

Subject: Re: The Ultimate Hormesis Paper





> Note also that this is a very well-known situation to the mainstream

> radiation protection policy people. $ millions have been spent on "dose

> reconstruction," including U.S. agencies and workers; and $ millions have

> been spent on "medical screening" of people in those units.

>

> The population is therefore in a few well-defined groups, with some

limited

> uncertainty about who/how many are in the low-dose group. But Taipei city

> gov't has put some boundaries on it below the original boundaries put on

by

> the national gov't. The initial effort to identify the people and their

> doses are pretty much in place.

>

> But despite this simplicity, and promises from many gov't and other

> important Taiwanese (in Taiwan, the U.S. and elsewhere, including, e.g.,

the

> U.S. and German ambassadors) who initially "promised" that making the data

> available for researchers would be done, after many months they would not

> return phone calls. The highest levels of the ICRP/NCRP/UNSCEAR/IAEA/IRPA

> group are intimately familiar with these group and the demand for an

> analysis, but have, if anything, supported the idea that if anything is to

> be done, they would do it (in secret).

>

> (Note that the authors submitted a paper also to IRPA 2000 in Hiroshima,

and

> that did not get to the review committee. But numerous papers by the

medical

> scanners, with great concern about the poor victims, were presented.)

>

> The fact that the population is pretty well defined, with medical

histories

> taken, makes epi obfuscation harder. But the response to requests to

conduct

> an epi study may NOT make the data available to independent researchers

that

> have been requesting the data to conduct the study, but that a "study"

will

> suddenly be issued by the "usual suspects" of the gov't-funded epi's. But

in

> this case it is harder to do that since the data are relatively simple and

> direct, unlike "radon studies" and "occupational studies," combined with

the

> interested parties watching carefully, unlike most epi studies, e.g., the

> RERF and DOE occupational exposure studies.

>

> The dataset that the epi researchers need is primarily just the ages of

the

> residents, along with death certificates, as long as there is enough

ability

> and effort required to verify the data. The long refusal to make the data

> available for the last 5 years indicates that the data may be being

> "adjusted" before it is made available, or like RERF we may get "answers"

> with no one able to see the actual data, not even the BEIR V consultants.

>

> But, be prepared to critically review a paper from the "usual suspects"

that

> will suddenly appear at some point. But will the raw data be clean?

>

> Our friends in Taiwan, Luan, Chen, et al., will be the key to being able

to

> verify the data! Also, it is only by their long and continuing effort that

> this most significant population is even known outside the high walls of

the

> gov't rad protection establishment.

>

> Thanks to all who keep this light alive, here to Otto Raabe!

>

> Regards, Jim

>

>

> on 7/23/03 7:33 PM, Ted Rockwell at tedrock@cpcug.org wrote:

>

> > This is indeed a provocative paper.  Dr. Luan has been presenting this

> > information at ANS and other meetings for several years, including the

> > special ANS session on low-dose radiation health effects arranged by Jim

> > Muckerheide in 1999.  But there is marked reluctance by responsible

> > organizations to follow up on it. The data need further refinement, in

> > particular age adjustment.  But I understand the authors are not being

given

> > the data necessary to do this.  Stealing the poster before it can be

seen is

> > a new low.

> >

> > If an organization with stature (and money) would publicly push to get

this

> > information, it would presumably come forth.  With no contamination or

> > inhalation aspects to confound the situation, it is indeed a unique and

> > nearly ideal situation for study.  Instead, money continues to go to

> > studying A-bomb victims, miners, and Russian victims of chemical and

> > radiological contamination.  It is outrageous that efforts to present

this

> > work to a respected peer-reviewed journal are thwarted by the very

> > organizations that should be supporting them.

> >

> > Ted Rockwell

> >

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

> > [mailto:owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu]On Behalf Of Otto G. Raabe

> > Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 1:37 PM

> > To: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

> > Subject: The Ultimate Hormesis Paper

> >

> >

> > July 23, 2003

> > HPS Meeting, San Diego, CA

> >

> > At the ongoing 48th Annual Meeting of the Health Physics Society here in

> > San Diego, I encountered poster paper P.78 entitled "The Beneficial

Health

> > Effects of Chronic Radiation Experienced in the Incident of Co-60

> > Contaminated Apartments in Taiwan." This paper has 14 authors, all

> > associated with nuclear and radiation protection organizations in Taiwan

> > including one from the National Taiwan University. The lead authors are

> > W.L. Chen and Y.C. Luan, Nuclear Sciences and Technology Association,

4th

> > F, W. 245, Sec. 3, Roosevelt Road, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC.

> >

> > About 20 years ago 180 apartment buildings comprising about 1700

apartments

> > were built using rebar containing Co-60 from a discarded source. It was

> > about 10 years before this incident was discovered. This paper discusses

> > the incidence of cancer and detectable genetic defects in about 10,000

> > people who lived from 9 to 20 years in these apartments. The highest

> > irradiated apartment had dose rates of about 0.5 Sv per year and the

lowest

> > about 0.02 Sv per year. The paper describes dosimetric reconstruction

> > showing that the average total excess dose for the 10,000 people in the

> > study was about 0.4 Sv, while some had total doses as high as 6 Sv.

> >

> > The authors compared the approximately 10,000 people in this study with

> > published cancer mortality statistics and reported an expected incidence

of

> > cancer in these 10,000 people of about 217 cases of cancer during the

study

> > period. The number of cases found was only 7. This demonstrated about a

97%

> > reduction in cancer incidence for people living in the high radiation

> > environment of these contaminated apartment. They found a similar

reduction

> > in "genetic defects". The authors could not find any obvious confounding

> > factors associated with their study.

> >

> > The abstract of this paper is found in a recent published HPS Journal

> > Supplement. You can write to the authors to get the whole paper.

> >

> > I was told by the program committee that this paper was submitted as a

> > poster to the HPS meeting held in Tampa last year. In that meeting the

> > title was "The True Health Effects of Radiation Revealed in the Incident

of

> > Co-60 Contamination in Taiwan." Unfortunately, someone stole the whole

> > poster an hour after it was mounted last year, so few people saw it.

> >

> > The authors seem to indicate that their work is not being given the

> > attention it deserves. Many would like to disregard it as nonsencse.

> > Clearly, there should be a detailed independent scientific evaluation of

> > these data and a more complete study to verify or discredit the

findings.

> > I'm not sure who would be willing to fund such a study.

> >

> > Otto

> > *****************************************************

> > Prof. Otto G. Raabe, Ph.D., CHP

> > Center for Health & the Environment (CHE)

> > (Street Address: Bldg. 3792, Old Davis Road)

> > University of California, Davis, CA 95616

> > E-Mail: ograabe@ucdavis.edu

> > Phone:(530) 752-7754, FAX:(530) 758-6140

> > *****************************************************

>



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

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/