Re: Conspiracy to suppress the shipyard stu

[hwade@triax.com (H. Wade Patterson)]

Bernard L Cohen wrote:
> 
>         Not publishing a high quality $10 million study is a crime against
> the scientific community, no matter what the excuse. Certainly, not
> being paid for the writing is no excuse. Any ethical scientist
> would feel compelled to do this on his own time if necessary. Bias in what
> appears in the scientific literature is at least as bad as bias in
> carrying out a scientific study for the effect it has on the scientific
> method.
>         Could someone write a report on the study and publish it in some
> scientific journal, like HEALTH PHYSICS? If no one else can do it, I will
> volunteer if someone gets me the information. But a member of the review
> committee would be much more appropriate.

I'm almost certain that Art Upton was chair of the Technical Advisory
Panel and both John Cameron and Merril Eisenbud were members. 

The report itself is 300+ pages long but the section of most interest is
shorter.

Here's a summary I prepared. Sorry about the table format. You'll have
to make the best of it.

Summary of the Nuclear Shipyard Workers Study

The study is reported in:
G.M. Matanoski et al., "Health effects of low-level radiation in
shipyard workers", Final report, Johns Hopkins University, Department of
Epidemiology, (June 1991).
DOE Contract Number: DE-AC02-79EV10095

4 Discussion
	4.1 Summary of findings
"The study of health effects of low-dose radiation in shipyard worker
reports analyses using standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) and an
external comparison. The data are presented in two ways: the total
experience of all individuals is analyzed according to the dose category
which individuals reached, either at the time of death or at the end of
the study period, or the experience of individuals is counted in each
dose category in which individuals contributed person-years of follow-up
during the course of the study. The first type of analysis is referred
to as "categorical" analyses and the second, "time-dependent" analysis.
The analyses represent the results from data available at the end of the
contract and include death information collected through December,
1981."

"The SMRs from the categorical analysis in which the individual remains
in the same group throughout follow-up indicate that the risks of death
in the NNW (non-nuclear workers) group of shipyard workers are similar
to that of the general population, but the risks of total mortality in
both groups of nuclear workers (<0.5 rem, and *0.5 rem) are lower than
the U.S. rate. The all cause mortality is highest for he NNW group and
lowest for the *0.5 rem group which certainly does not suggest that
radiation causes a general risk of death. In fact, in the *0.5 rem
group, the mortality is only 76% of that of the general population and
is significantly lower than would be expected."

"The SMRs for leukemia and all lymphatic and hematopoietic cancers (LHC)
indicate risks of these diseases among nuclear workers which are below
those of the general population. The SMR of 1.10 for the NNW group
indicates that the observed deaths are similar in number to those
expected based on population rates. The only unusual feature of the data
is the fact that, unlike the SMRs for all cause mortality, for these two
causes of death the SMR for the *0.5 rem group is higher than the SMR
for the <0.5 rem group. Thus, a comparison between these two groups
suggests that the leukemia ratio is 2.17 times higher and the lymphatic
and hematopoietic cancers ratio is 1.55 times high in the *0.5 rem group
than in the <0.5 rem group. However, in no case are the ratios
significantly higher than those of the external comparison group of U.S.
white males at a p * 0.05. Certainly, the risks of leukemia or all
hematopoietic neoplasms are not high compared to the NNW group."

"In conclusion, the nuclear worker population does not show a
significant increase in the risk of any of the cancers studied except
for mesothelioma when compared to the general population. Mesotheliomas
are known to be asbestos related and the role of this substance in the
apparent risk needs to be determined in future analysis. A lower but
significant excess was also noted in non-nuclear workers. The mortality
from lung cancer is slightly higher than that of U.S. males for the
shipyard population as a whole, but within the subgroups only the NNW
group has a statistically significant increase. Among the nuclear
workers, the slight risk increase, while not statistically significant
compared to the general population, appears to increase with increasing
radiation DE (dose equivalent) level. These results would have to be
controlled for asbestos and smoking before any weight can be placed on
the observation."

"The data clearly indicate that both nuclear worker groups have a lower
mortality from leukemia and lymphatic and hematopoietic cancers than
does the non-nuclear group. All three groups have lower rates than the
general population. However, if the <0.5 rem group or the 0.5-0.9 rem
group is used for comparison, then all dose groups 1.0 rem and above in
the * 0.5 rem group have higher mortality rates than the <0.5 rem group
for both leukemia and all lymphatic hematopoietic neoplasms. There is no
consistent dose response with radiation that would suggest that
radiation is not the factor associated with the increase. Therefore,
further investigation must be focused on whether variations in jobs or
other shipyard exposures or non-job related risk factors may be
influencing the rate of disease among the nuclear workers. The SMRs are
very sensitive to any changes, such as lagging, due to small numbers, so
these within group observations may simply represent chance variations."

Table 4.1.A
Mortality for selected causes, *0.5 rem group, <0.5 rem group, and NNW:
Summary of Standardized Mortality Ratios.

Cause, SMR *0.5 rem, 95% C.I., SMR <0.5 rem, 95% C.I., SMR NNW, 95% C.I.
All, 0.76, 0.73-0.79, 0.81, 0.76-0.86, 1.00, 0.97-1.03, 
Leukemia, 0.91, 0.56-1.39, 0.42, 0.11-1.07, 0.97, 0.65--1.39
LHC, 0.82, 0.61-1.08, 0.53, 0.28-0.91, 1.10, 0.88-1.37
Meso-thelioma, 5.11, 3.03-8.08, 5.75, 2.48-11.33, 2.41, 1.16-4.43
Lung cancer, 1.07, 0.94-1.21, 1.11, 0.90-1.35, 1.15, 1.02-1.29

Comments:
1. All of the above is a direct quotation from the report.
2. The fact that the SMR for the NNW group is 1.0 belies the much touted
"healthy worker effect."
3. The all-cancer rate of .76 for the *0.5 rem group is approximately 16
standard deviations lower than that for the general population.
4. The table has its columns delimited by commas, and its rows by
paragraph marks. It can be re-formatted, if desired, with the "insert
table" function of Microsoft Word, and perhaps other word processing
programs.

Best wishes,
-- 
Wade

mailto:hwade@triax.com

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