RE: A respectable end to Cohen's LNTT radon debate has arrived!

["Wes Van Pelt" <WesVanPelt@att.net>]

Steve and Radsafers,



I just read the very recent article in Health Physics by Heath, C W. Jr ;

Bond, P D.; Hoel, D G.; and Meinhold, C B. (December 2004)



Here is my quick take on the article.



They did re-analyze Cohen's lung cancer versus radon data and found the same

negative correlation! After correcting for smoking, they still found the

negative correlation that Cohen did. Then, the authors claim that this can

not be so because it does not fit their preconceived notion that radon

causes lung cancer. Their only explanation is a supposition that some

unknown correlation involving smoking causes a systematic discrepancy,

particularly in low radon counties. They give no quantitative theoretical

basis (not even hypothetical numerical relationships) as to how this unknown

correlation is giving the "wrong answer".



I think Cohen's treatment is much more analytical, numerical and,

ultimately, convincing. I welcome comments.



Best regards,

Wes

Wesley R. Van Pelt, PhD, CIH, CHP

Wesley R. Van Pelt Associates, Inc.



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

From: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

[mailto:owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu] On Behalf Of Steve Miller

Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 5:43 PM

To: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Subject: A respectable end to Cohen's LNTT radon debate has arrived!





Please see previous Radsafe post by Mr. Howard -

http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/0306/msg00282.html



The recent article in the Health Physics Journal puts to rest for me the

validity of Dr. Cohen's assertions that he has shown the LNTT is invalid.

I think a respectable end has arrived!  Even a physicist on the committee

agrees the inverse finding is smoking related. Dr. Cohen's rebuttal is not

convincing.  This issued has now been argued ad nauseum for the past 10

years.  Can we find agreement it is now over??  



RESIDENTIAL RADON EXPOSURE AND LUNG CANCER RISK: COMMENTARY ON COHEN'S

COUNTY-BASED STUDY. 

Health Physics. 87(6):647-655, December 2004.

Heath, C W. Jr *; Bond, P D. +; Hoel, D G. ++; Meinhold, C B. +[S] 

Abstract: 

mdash;: The large United States county-based study ( Cohen 1995, 2001) in

which an inverse relationship has been suggested between residential

low-dose radon levels and lung cancer mortality has been reviewed. While

this study has been used to evaluate the validity of the linear nonthreshold

theory, the grouped nature of its data limits the usefulness of this

application. Our assessment of the study's approach, including a reanalysis

of its data, also indicates that the likelihood of strong, undetected

confounding effects by cigarette smoking, coupled with approximations of

data values and uncertainties in accuracy of data sources regarding levels

of radon exposure and intensity of smoking, compromises the study's analytic

power. The most clear data for estimating lung cancer risk from low levels

of radon exposure continue to rest with higher-dose studies of miner

populations in which projections to zero dose are consistent with estimates

arising from most case-control studies!

 regarding residential exposure.



Steve Miller







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

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/