Re: Leukemia in the news

[John Moulder <jmoulder@post.its.mcw.edu>]

> Has anyone actually read the Environmental Health Perspectives article?

This material was extensively discussed on RadSafe and elsewhere when the
study was first published. (jan/feb 97).

The "study" is considered to have very little credibility in the
epidemiological community.

Several things to keep in mind.  

1) This is re-analysis of the Hatch et al data (Amer J Epidem
132:397-412).  No new information appears to have been added.  Note that
hatch et al concluded that there was no radiation-related increase
in cancer (or leukemia).

2)  The increase in leukemia claimed by Wing et al is not statistically
significant, even in their own analysis.  

3)  Despite being published in 1997, the wing et al analysis is based only
only on cancer appearing through 1985.

4)  This is an ecological study design of the worst sort.

5)  Wing et al reports no significant exposure-response trend for
leukemia, or for any type of cancer

What really suprises me is that the Leukemia Society appears to be
presenting this is "accepted science" on their web site, rather than as an
extreme view that has been rejected by most scientists who know anything
about the subject.