Re: LNT and whose junk science?

["H.Wade Patterson" <hwade@talltown.com>]

Darryl Kaurin wrote, in part:

> As for the work of Cohen, I was extremely impressed with his analysis.
> Since the results are extremely surprising, one must question if an
> ecological study is appropriate, since the radon doses assigned are average
> values for the entire county.

Dr. Kaurin and others:
I'd like an explanation of why the Japanese survivor data is not an
"ecological" study. No Japanese wore a dosimeter. Doses are assigned
solely on the basis of "entire" radial increments. How are radial
increments different than counties? By the way, the errors in doses so
assigned are 30%-50% due to potential inverse quare law differences. 


-- 
Best wishes,

Wade

<hwade@talltown.com>

H.Wade Patterson
1116 Linda Lane
Lakeview OR 97630
ph 541 947-4974