RE: Leukemia in the news

["Colvett, Robert D." <rdcolvett@tva.gov>]

I have seen the whole article, but too long ago to remember its details.
One trend of logic in it was to infer that the doses to the people in
the
area must have been much larger than those published, because 
much larger doses would be needed to produce the correlations 
suggested by the statistics.

There is more of the story at

     http://ehpnet1.niehs.nih.gov/docs/1997/105-1/forum.html

which adds some discussion.

R Dee Colvett
Florence  al


> ----------
> From: 	GACMail98@aol.com[SMTP:GACMail98@aol.com]
> Sent: 	Saturday, June 13, 1998 2:53 AM
> To: 	Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: 	Re: Leukemia in the news
> 
> The abstract of the article "A Reevaluation of Cancer Incidence Near
> the Three
> Mile Island Nuclear Plant: The Collision of Evidence and Assumptions"
> is
> available at
> http://ehpnet1.niehs.nih.gov/docs/1997/105-1/wingabs.html.  Full-
> text seems available online only by subscription.
> 
> Subj:	Re: Leukemia in the news
> Date:	06/12/98
> To:	radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
> 
> << Is the Environmental Health Perspectives peer reviewed?  Mike Baker
> ...
> mcbaker@lanl.gov>>
> 
> "Environmental Health Perspectives" is a peer-reviewed journal of the
> U.S.
> Department of Health, Education and Welfare, National Institutes of
> Health,
> National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle
> Park,
> NC.  (http://ehis.niehs.nih.gov/)
> 
> Glenn
> gacmail98@aol.com
>