Re: Re-analysis of Cohen's ecologic radon study

[BERNARD L COHEN <blc+@PITT.EDU>]

On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Dr Christoph Hofmeyr wrote:



>>The fact that males are almost 5 times

more likely (on average) to die from lung cancer over the whole range is a

clear indication that radon concentration is probably irrelevant as a

cause

in the range considered.  If I'm not mistaken, the very similar male and

female 'shape of the dependence'  despite a 5:1 ratio on an absolute scale

seems to preclude radon as a cause.



	--It is well known that the male-female difference in lung cancer

rates is due to the difference in smoking prevalence in the time period

considered. To a good approximation, lung cancer is a disease of smokers,

with their risk dependent on radon exposure according to BEIR. Why should

this risk dependence be different for males and females -- it is not

according to BEIR.

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

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/