Re: rad exp to pilots and flight attendants

[Free Spirit <FRANK@rover.bsd.uchicago.edu>]

>From:	SMTP%"radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu" 15-NOV-1995 08:21:41.31

>>I suggest you get a copy of the British Medical Journal, Volume 311, 9 Sept
>>1995, pages 649-652 entitled "Incidence of cancer among Finnish airline
>>cabin attendants, 1967-92". 1577 women were followed up for an average of
>>13.9 years. They found a significant excess of breast cancer ...
>
>What cabin attendant risk factors contribute to this excess breast cancer?
>Breathing recirculated air, cramped working conditions, tight schedules, etc.
>Is this slight radiation exposure was the only thing distinguishing this
>population from the rest of "social class 1"?

	It is just as easy, (and as wrong,) to draw the conclusion that,
	since cabin smoking was not prohibited for the great majority of
	the study, and correcting for the time required for the cancer to
	grow to detectable size, that the exposure to second-hand smoke
	was the cause.

	Unfortunately, radiation-generating businesses in general do not
	have the financial resources that Joe Camel's backers have. 

	Hey, maybe if we started giving coupons for every flight, 2 coupons for
	every chest x-ray, etc and you could collect them and send in for
	neat coats, lead-lined shorts, etc. we'd have enough money to produce
	more positive publicity. ;-)

Frank R. Borger - Physicist     ___      "One third of the rats were improved
Michael Reese - U of Chicago   |___      on the experimental medication, one
Center for Radiation Therapy   | |_) _   third remained the same, and the 
net: Frank@rover.uchicago.edu    | \|_)  other one third could not be repor-
ph: 312-791-8075 fa: 791-2517       |_)  ted on, because that rat got away."
                                         - Edwin Bidwell Wilson