Re: Pearl

[JMUCKERHEIDE@delphi.com]

Rich,

What insight!  
 
> OK, folks - this is bound to start a flame war ;-)
> 
> Are the health benefit claims of the radonistas regarding their home 
> radon "remediations" any more supportable than the claims of Pearl 
> Wisdom?

As you indicate, it is indeed LESS supportable since the radon data showing no 
adverse health effects (and Dr. Cohen's massive national data base indicating
a negative correlation), and the demonstration that even if uranium miner lung 
cancer at VERY high doses were associated with radon exposure (which may be
proven false if a study from Europe on genetics stands up), lung cancer in
non-smokers is of a different type, are MUCH better data AGAINST an indoor
radon association, than exists against "subtle energy"! 

> Various papers in the HPJ would seem to indicate not.

And many sources not in HPJ, especially radon spa workers and populations, and 
German water works populations (within one pump hall at, if I remember
correctly, 730,000 pCi/l as reported by Klaus Becker).  [Does anybody know if
Dr. Becker has an email address?]  

> Perhaps there should be a "subtle energy" section in the HPS ala the 
> Radon Section.

Ha!
 
> ****************************************************************
> *      Rich Oesterling, CHP     ogr@twinpeak.inel.gov          *
> *     "What opinions?  I'm not permitted to have any."         *
> *                Get Really Warped - Get Unix                  *
> ****************************************************************

Who needs opinions when you have facts to work with.

Regards, Jim