(no subject)

[Mrtgoldman@aol.com]

Otto:

After I sent the previous message, I cam across a 1950-1980 Cancer Atlas which
shows: 

for the 1950-59 period, 

white males:  most of (northern) Arizona and a small area in southern Arizona,
Utah, northwestern Colorado, and (roughly) the northern and eastern half of
Wyoming as "significantly high, but not in the highest 10%"; Nevada was within
the average range.

white females: northern Arizona and almost all of Nevada are "significantly
low", Utah and northwestern NM are  "significantly high, but not in the
highest 10%", and CO & WY are within the average range

for the 1960-69 period:

white males: the "significantly high..." category remained the same in Arizona
(except for the small southern area which was in the "highest 10%"), remained
the same in WY, and shrunk significantly in UT and CO.  

White females:   Arizona was within the average range, except for two areas
along the southern border which were in the "highest 10%" but NOT overlapping
the similarly ranked area for males;  NV, UT, WY and western CO were all
within the average range, and the northwestern NM are remained essentially the
same as in the previous period.  

The time trend from 1950 to 1980 showed:

for white males: AZ, NV, UT, CO, WY  within the average range of -7.6% over
the 5 years; northwest NM showed an increasing rate significantly greater than
the US average.
 
for white females: AZ, NM, NV, and UT within the average range of -12.1% over
the 5 years.  Northern and eastern WY showed an increasing rate significantly
greater than the US average, while southwestern CO showed a decreasing rate
significantly less than the US average.

There is no clear pattern I can observe -- but I've been known to be somewhat
nearsighted...

Mort Goldman
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html