Re: ?Linear Assumption

["Will Atkinson (B364 X4370)" <will.atkinson@aea.orgn.uk>]

HWADE writes:

>If one believes that data subject to the "ecologic fallacy" should be
>disregarded, shouldn't  the Hiroshima and Nagasaki data, that some say
>support the Linear Assumption and ALARA, also be disregarded?  Aren't these
>data also subject to the "ecologic  fallacy?"

No.  The Bomb Survivor data compares individual reconstructed doses
with individual health outcomes.  It would be an ecological study if,
for example, it had compared the mortality rates of people within 1
mile of the epicentre with people 1-2 miles away, 3-5 miles away etc,
and assumed that any differences were caused by radiation dose.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Will Atkinson                                Internet: will.atkinson@aeat.co.uk
Health Effects                               
AEA Technology, 364 Harwell, Didcot          Phone:    +44 1235 434370
Oxfordshire, OX11 0RA, U.K.                  FAX:      +44 1235 432134
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -