Epidemiology vs. Radiation Biology

["Scott O. Schwahn" <schwahn@CEBAF.GOV>]

At 05:21 PM 3/25/96 -0600, Alex Zapantis wrote:
...
>It seems that we will probably never be able to determine with any measure
>of certainty the effects of low dose/dose rate radiation using
>epidemiological studies. Perhaps researchers should move away from
>epidemiology and place more emphasis on radiation biology in an attempt to
>resolve this problem. Do we really have a clear understanding of the
>processes involved in radiocarcinogenesis? Do our current models take into
>account environmental factors and exposures to other agents which may have a
>synergistic or antagonistic effect. Do we know why there is a latency period
>between exposure and the onset of cancer? I think not (OPINION).

I agree (OPINION).  One of the things that statistics shows us is that there
is no good way to determine a parameter (threshold in this case) in a regime
in which there is no data (or the data is immeasurable).  In order to do
that, we have to make assumptions, which is what we try to avoid.  It is
fairly easy to determine a linear (or otherwise), least-squares fit to data
where there are measureable effects, but one cannot assume that the linear
(or other) function continues in the same manner below this level.  So, in
order to figure this all out, we need to be able to measure smaller
effects... and how they relate to the "big picture".

Scott O. Schwahn, CHP
Operational Health Physicist
Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility
(804)249-7551 (w)
(804)249-7363 (fax)
schwahn@cebaf.gov