Re: Nasal Irradiation / Thesis Availability

[Scott Schwahn <schwahn@jlab.org>]

You have really confused me on this issue.  Would you please address the following questions?

RADPROJECT@aol.com wrote:

> I pointed out in one of my posts of 2/2/99 that the above  Ph.D. Thesis was
> available contrary to a denial in Oct. 1998 from the Hopkins School of Public
> Health that it was unavailable to "outsiders".

I looked at your RADSAFE posts from 2/2 and I can't see where any of them say this. In fact, in recent posts you say that Hopkins denied its existence;  I am led to  believe that you were implying, as Mr. Holloway pointed out, that the report is STILL not available, since you did not specifically point out that it is now available.  I can't really even tell for sure what you're saying - since you put no commas in your sentence, I can't tell which part _you_ are saying and which part _they_ are saying.  Are they denying that they denied it?  Are they saying that is available or unavailable at the present time?  If it is available, why did you conspicuously leave this fact out of previous posts?

> The thesis submittal date to
> Johns Hopkins by Yeh was June, 1997 with the award of her doctorate in 1998.
> Hopkins was still denying to reporters and other interested parties in June
> 1998 that the research done by Yeh in following up on children treated at the
> Hopkins Hagerstown, MD clinic reported in Yeh, 1997 was in fact completed, and
> reported on in June 1997.

Could this simply be because the report date was delayed?  Is it possible that those who are responsible for denying the thesis' existence looked it up under the date and did not find it?

> For the above reasons and many others connected with completely erroneous or
> distorted statements by numerous Hopkins'  spokespersons on the health risks
> of NRI vs. their own research results that I have raised the issue of ethical
> breaches by Hopkins and even coverup of information needed by special
> populations at risk as to prudent medical monitoring steps.

Sorry, again, I can't tell what you are saying here.  This is a very long sentence with no commas.  It could mean several very different things, depending on where you break it apart.

If you take the sentence, "An engineer without a health physicist is in trouble" without appropriate commas, you can read it in two ways:
"An engineer, without a health physicist, is in trouble."
"An engineer without, a health physicist is in trouble."

Not the best of English, but you get the point.  Would you please add some commas or break the sentence apart so it can be understood clearly?  It's possible that some of the confusion from your RADSAFE audience results from sentence structure.

Thanks for your contributions to lively discussion!
Scott

--
Scott O. Schwahn, CHP
Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility
schwahn@jlab.org


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