Nasal Radium Irradiation - Response to General Post from Holloway3

[RADPROJECT@aol.com]

In a message dated 2/2/99 8:33:52 PM Eastern Standard Time, Holloway3@aol.com
writes:

<< Subj:	 Re: Nasal Radium Irradiation - Boston Globe Feature Article Question
Response
 Date:	2/2/99 8:33:52 PM Eastern Standard Time
 From:	Holloway3@aol.com
 To:	radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu (Multiple recipients of list)
 
 In a message dated 2/1/1999 8:38:33 AM Pacific Standard Time,
 RADPROJECT@aol.com writes:
 
 <<   A recently published update of the Hagerstown cohort [Yeh, 1997] based
on
  a Ph.D. thesis at Hopkins School of Public Health which is being kept out of
  public view,   >>
 
 Mr. Farber:
 
 Is the above thesis available to the public now, yes or no?  I am curious on
 that point since most such publications are at least available in the
 University library if nowhere else.   >>

I have written Mr. Holloway a private post on this question explaining my
observation in some detail about Johns Hopkins misleading the public on the
issue of health risks of NRI and the status of its own in-house research. I
simply asked him to reread my posts to RADSAFE and patiently e-mailed him
directly on this matter, since he continued to pose the same question,
ignoring information supplied directly to him. Since he has made another
general post to RADSAFE on this point, I am responding to RADSAFE with this
post. Mr. Holloway seems unwilling to accept what has been supplied to him and
keeps asking the same question about the actions by Johns Hopkins in keeping
adverse information about the health risks of NRI from the public.

As I posted to RADSAFE on 2/1/99:


<>

As I noted in my E-mail to Holloway3 on 2/1:

<<Suggest you reread my post. You seem to have missed some important points.

As noted, the Hopkins Dept of Public Health [Oct. 1998] told me in response to
my direct request about getting the Yeh thesis, that it was not available to
"outsiders" until after publication of any results in a journal. Clearly
false. A thesis submitted for a Ph.D. is a public document and Hopkins knew
it. They were trying to limit public awareness of the findings.

The main way Hopkins has tried to keep the results out of public view is to
deny the study is completed and keep reporters or anyone else from knowing new
research data is available. This was discussed in my response in some detail.
They have lied on numerous occassions to reporters about the research being
completed and failed to acknowledge the findings of adverse health effects.

How would you characterize these actions? >>


Is there something unclear in what is stated above? Holloway3's  e-mails on
this subject seem unnecessarily hostile. [i.e.: He asks in the current
question:  Is the above thesis available to the public now, yes or no?]. This
question has been asked and answered previously, and repeat questions about it
should not be posed in the manner of an attorney at a trial.

Stewart Farber, MS Public Health
Director - Radium Experiment Assessment Project [REAP]
19 Stuart St.
Pawtucket, RI 02860

Phone/FAX: (401) 727-4947  E-mail: radproject@usa.net
            Web address: http://www.delphi.com/carsreap




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