CORRECTION - data analysis on the nuclear shipyard worker study NSWS)

["Howard Long" <hflong@pacbell.net>]

NSWS had 2 tails - but wagged only one! Howard Long



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

From: "John Cameron" <jrcamero@wiscmail.wisc.edu>

To: "Howard Long" <hflong@pacbell.net>

Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2003 7:53 PM

Subject: Clarification of data analysis on the nuclear shipyard worker study

NSWS)





> Dear Howard, I  may have inadvertently given the impression that the

> the data analysis was "one tailed" but I don't recall every using

> that terminology. I believe what may have led to confusion is that I

> probably quoted the purpose of the study was to determine the amount

> of detriment to the health of the nuclear shipyard workers because of

> the radiation. The results were postive rather than negative much to

> the surprise of DOE and probably many others, especially on the NCRP.

> The final report and the DOE news release about the results of the

> NSWS avoided pointing out the health benefits to the nuclear workers.

> I believe that is the basic reasson the details of the study have

> never been published in peer reviewed journal. I am sure that if  the

> results had confirmed the LNT assumption, it would have been

> published promptly. See the following URLs on my web page:

> Nuclear Shipyard Workers Study (NSWS)

> 1. -The unpublished review article on the NSWS by Ruth Sponsler and

> John Cameron - http://www.medphysics.wisc.edu/~jrc/art_nsws1.htm

> 2. The misleading news release by DOE about the NSWS -

> http://www.medphysics.wisc.edu/~jrc/art_nsws2.htm

> 3. John Cameron's present view of what the news release should have

> said. http://www.medphysics.wisc.edu/~jrc/art_nsws3.htm

> My article: Longevity is the most appropriate measure of

> health effects of radiation to be published in the October issue of

> Radiology is available  at:

> http://www.medphysics.wisc.edu/~jrc/art_longevity.htm

>

> I am still surprised that the details of the NSWS have not

> been published.  I peronally think the data in the Berrington et al

> article:

>   Berrington, A, Darby, SC, Weiss, HA, Doll, R. 100 years of

> observation on British radiologists: mortality from cancer and other

> causes 1897-1997 Br J Radiol. 74, 507-519 (2001) is more convincing

> about the important finding that the biggest health effect was the

> increased longevity due to reduced deaths from non-cancer. That is

> the point of my article in Radiology.

> I think we should be pushing for a double blind study of

> senior citizens in the Gulf States as I suggested in my article  Is

> radiation an essential trace energy? Physics and Society October 2001

> available on the Web at

> http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/2001/october/a5oct01.html.

> I am not sending this to the list server. You may submit it

> to the list if you wish. I think you put words into my mouth that I

> don't think I wrote or said. I'll leave it up to you to clarify the

> situation.

> I am sure the PI of the NSWS and the DOE were aware of the

> good news in the results of the NSWS. As far as I know it didn't

> involved one-tail tests.

> Best wishes, John.

>

>

> >John Cameron, one of the 8 Nuclear Shipyard Worker Study scientific

advisory

> >commitee, says only a one tailed test was done (to detect harm but not

> >benefit). I don't have his address at this computer, but most of you have

it

> >or can sort for messages here months ago.

> >

> >The only problem I have seen claimed with the NSWS was the claim that

> >applicants for that job were more strictly screened for health problems

than

> >for the seemingly identical control group. The differences seem to me far

> >too great (0.76 total mortality rate when > 0.5 excess rad) to be caused

by

> >that.

> >

> >Howard Long



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

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/