AW: Denver

["Jim Hoerner" <jim_hoerner@HOTMAIL.COM>]

>From: Franz Schönhofer <franz.schoenhofer@chello.at>



>Only now I recognized the link given in the mail below and got at once

>alarmed when seeing "gfstrahlenschutz.de". The socalled "Gesellschaft

>für Strahlenschutz" (or as they call themselves "Society for Radiation

>Protection" is  n o t  (!!!) a society which comprises the relevant

>experts and scientists in radiation protection, but a clearly

>anti-nuclear, anti-radioactivity, anti-scientific aggregation of

>agitators and self-declared experts.



Hi, Franz.



I realize the importance of considering the source of the information, and I 

also recognize that anti-nuclear activists are usually wrong, but this type 

of argument you present is comparable to an ad hominem, and does not hold 

much weight with the public.



>The name of this "Gesellschaft für Strahlenschutz" has been deliberately

>used to pretend an official character, like often words like

>"Institute", "Research Institute", "Association", "Independent" etc. are

>used.



[Snip lots of information about the authors' prior "work"]



>I could go on, but I think it is not worth the time wasted.



Okay, okay.  That's probably good enough for me, but I was hoping for 

specific flaws in the scientific methods of their paper, rather than an 

attack of the authors.



>I hope this gives you a correct view on some facts.



With all due respect, not really.  While I suspect the paper is flawed, I 

would be embarrassed trying to debunk it by saying that the authors' 

previous works make them incredulous.  Their thesis is, that when correcting 

for confounders, Denver is not proof of cosmic hormesis.  Correcting for 

confounders is quite scientific.



>This is not a comment supporting hormesis!



Sure it is!  :-)



>Richard L. Hess <lists@richardhess.com>



>Am I reading this correctly, that the lower oxygen pressure may reduce 

>cancer risk?



Hi, Richard.



I was particularly interested in that claim.  I pondered it for a moment, 

and came up with the probably-bogus hypothesis that lower oxygen pressure 

results in fewer free radicals in the body.



As I mentioned to Franz in private email, if oxygen is bad for me, I want to 

know, since I can certainly do something about that!



Regards,

Jim

Who's still holding his breath



--

Hold the door for the stranger behind you. When the driver in the adjacent 

lane signals to get over, slow down. Smile and say "hi" to the folks you 

pass on the sidewalk. Give blood. Volunteer.





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

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/