Re: If you do Science, use the Scientific Method!

[RuthWeiner@aol.com]

Perhaps one problem is that all cancers are lumped together in this theory (or policy, or whatever) as "cancer" or worse as "latent cancer fatalities"  (which I think is meant to be "latent fatal cancers"....).  Most cancers in adults older than 15, especially of the internal organs, are associated most directly with age; the older a man is, the more likely he is to have prostate cancer, for example.  Squamous cell skin cancer is very clearly correlated to sunlight exposure, and 95% of the cases are not fatal.  Melanoma is correlated somewhat to sunlight exposure, and most cases, if untreated are fatal.  Early-onset breast cancer seems to be genetically linked, while late-onset breast cancer seems to be age-related.  Lung cancer is strongly correlated to smoking. How can one actually fit a strictly linear correlation of cancer FATALITIES (emphasis deliberate) with ionizing radiation exposure into this picture, especially when treatment has greatly changed the fatality rate fr

om cancer?  Even if one allows it as a conservative theory, ought one not to say that (1) we have no data on low doses; (2) the possibility that a low dose might result in a cancer cannot be ruled out; (3) many cancers are treatable;  (4) most, if not all, so-called cancer clusters aren't cancer clusters at all, and so on.  The HPS policy of a standard of 100 mrem/year per source is far more reasonable than slavish adherence to a linear extrapolation. 



Just my thoughts, not my employer's or anyone else's.





Ruth



-- 

Ruth F. Weiner

ruthweiner@aol.com

505-856-5011

(o)505-284-8406