[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Love Canal
The following quote raises interesting epistemological questions:
"Surely, if the off-site TMI estimates are correct, no epidemiology study
could ever detect such an
association even if there were one. On the other hand, does it mean that
cancers from Love Canal don't exist, because they can not be detected? "
What is an association that can't be detected? What is the difference
between an association that can't be detected and one that doesn't exist?
Isn't that comparable to a disease that has no known symptoms, or a
subatomic particle that interacts with nothing?
As an empiricist, I think one must conclude that anything that can't be
measured doesn't exist. Or more precisely: To exist is to be measurable.
If no conceivable study could detect a putative association, an empiricist
must conclude that the association does not exist.
Clayton J. Bradt, CHP
Principal Radiophysicist
NYS Dept. of Labor
Radiological Health Unit
voice: (518) 457-1202
fax: (518) 485-7406
e-mail: Clayton.Bradt@labor.state.ny.us
************************************************************************
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/