Re: Pierce et al. 1996 article: Atomic Bomb Survivor Cancer MortalityData Update

[Keith Welch <welch@CEBAF.GOV>]

At 12:37 PM 1/14/97 -0600, you wrote:

>In my view, the paper makes no such claim. The reference to the 50 mSv =
>limit refers to the minimum dose for which there is a statistically =
>significant dose-response, not statistically significant excess relative =
>risk. Clearly, a statistically significant dose-response can be shown =
>using data points which do not reflect statistically significant excess =
>risk.


Being a non-expert in dose-response relationships, I don't understand the
difference between a statistically significant dose-response and a
statistically significant excess relative risk.  Does this report clearly
define these concepts, or is there another good reference I can go to for
some background on this to clarify it for myself?  I assumed if the
dose-response relationship is identified, it is done so by use of excess
risk - isn't that what the epidemiological data provide?

(It's no wonder the "general public" don't understand)


Keith Welch
Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility
Newport News VA
welch@cebaf.gov