[ RadSafe ] NAS "impartiality"

[John Jacobus]

Rather than asking me to interpret their conclusions,
why don't you read the report.  The appendix that
discusses hormesis is at
http://www.nap.edu/books/030909156X/html/579.html

I assume that you, like me, you can critically read
it. I admit that I am not trained in epidemiology.  I
do not know what your background and training are.  If
you are an epidemiologist, maybe you can tell me
scientifically what is wrong.  I assume that you will
be able to provide some evidence to back up your
assertions.


--- jjcohen at prodigy.net wrote:

> The only explanation I have seen, is that they found
> the evidence
> "unconvincing". If they gave any more cogent
> explanation, I missed it.
> Perhaps you can let us know what it is.
> Jerry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Jacobus" <crispy_bird at yahoo.com>
> To: <jjcohen at prodigy.net>; <radsafe at radlab.nl>
> Sent: Friday, July 01, 2005 3:12 PM
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] NAS "impartiality"
> 
> 
> > I think they indicated why they rejected the
> hormesis
> > studies.  If you do not accept their reasoning,
> maybe
> > you have a preconceived conclusion and cannot
> accept
> > their conclusions.
> 
> 



+++++++++++++++++++
"Every now and then a man's mind is stretched by a new idea and never shrinks back to its original proportion." -- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

-- John
John Jacobus, MS
Certified Health Physicist
e-mail:  crispy_bird at yahoo.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com