Re: RADON - Ecologic Studies -Reply

[rkathren@tricity.wsu.edu (Ron L. Kathren)]

Great idea, Mike.  It's not quite exactly radioepidemiology per se, but you
and all the other RADSAFERS might be interest in the one day program that
AAHP Past President Jerry Martin is organizing for the American Academy of
Health Physics sessions at the HPS meeting this coming July.  Jerry let me
have a peek at what he plans, which will include consideration of the LNT
and it regulatory implications.  Promises to be an exciting session, so get
there early to get a seat!

Ron Kathren, President
AAHP



At 10:03 AM 3/4/98 -0600, Mike Grissom wrote:
>Radsafers,
>
>Some years ago (Health Physics Aspects of Epidemiology,"
>Albuerquerque, NM, 1983) an HPS Mid-year Symposium was
>held on the general topic of radioepidemiology.  It was
>an excellent meeting, though focused at that time on
>Marshall Islanders and atomic veterans issues (which are
>still issues, mind you) and Jerry Falo's suggestion below
>(plus the activity and vehemence of positions on radsafe)
>would seem to indicate that this subject's "time has come
>again!"
>
>Those epidemiologists who are now monitoring radsafe and
>maybe some who aren't but who have been involved in
>studies such as BEIR VI would be excellent speakers.  We
>could then really hammer on the powers/weaknesses of case
>control and ecological studies through a better fundamental
>understanding of the abilities of epidemiological studies
>to resolve anything!  If nothing else, it could make us
>better able to knowledgeably comment on some of the studies
>being flaunted in the news media or at least keep them in
>more reasoned perspective.
>
>A thought...
>
>S.,
>
>MikeG.
>
>At 08:51 AM 3/4/98 -0600, you wrote:
>Hello All,
>     
>I don't know all the details of Dr. Cohen's study.  I'm not an 
>epidemiologist.  But I do know that no matter how powerful the 
>*ecologic study* is, Dr. Cohen's results can not be extended to
>all radiation under all conditions.
>
>All experiments are conditional in that they test for specific
>results under specific conditions.  I believe Dr. Cohen's study
>to be a powerful challenge to linearity for radon exposure and
>by implication radiation exposure to the lungs with lung cancer
>as the endpoint.
>
>As for data to disprove linearity, I don't believe that any one
>disputes that the studies are out there.  The dispute seems to
>be over the quality of the data.  I'm also afraid that I'm
>beginning to detect a *harshness* in the discussions that is
>unseemly.
>
>Also, I've noted a underlying theme that the LNT has caused
>public fear and political gridlock in dealing with radiation
>safety.  I would like to see some hard evidence of this.  My
>limited experience with public media indicates the most vocal
>opponents of radiation are not LNT supporters, but they seem
>to be followers of Gofman, Tamplin, Sternglass, Gould,
>Caldicott....and so on.  How many of the ICRP, NCRP, EPA, and
>so on do we see at protest marches and haranguing politicians.
>
>I for one appreciate the ongoing debate here on RADSAFE, and
>perhaps the HPS can organize a symposium and publish the
>proceedings that can be review in a more convenient form.
>
>     Jerry Falo
>     jer3ry@aol.com
>
>
>