Re: Nasal Irradiation / Thesis Availability -Health Effects Summary

[RADPROJECT@aol.com]

In a message dated 2/3/99 6:01:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, FIELDRW@aol.com
writes:

<< Stewart,
 
 		It is my understanding from colleagues that the material is not being
 covered-up, but that the investigator had family matters which kept her from
 completing the work in its entirety.  I understand she is back at work
putting
 the final touches on her thesis.  My guess is that it will be available in
the
 near future.  I know it took quite awhile before I received a copy of my
 thesis from microfilming.
 If you have proof it is being withheld for unethical reasons, it should be
 brought to the attention of epidemiologic ethics boards, who handle such
 behavior. >>

Dear Bill:
What I cited as Yeh, 1997 in my post of 2/1 to 2/3/99 relates to a completed
Ph.D. thesis by Dr. H.C. Yeh which was submitted to Hopkins dated June, 1997
with the degree awarded in 1998. The thesis is done. That is not the issue. 

The primary issue is that several Hopkins spokespersons denied in response to
direct questions about the status of Yeh's research from Aug. 1997 to at least
June 1998 that the research in Hagerstown conducted by Dr. Yeh as part of her
Ph.D. thesis research, was, in fact, completed, and a thesis submitted. Also
when the degree was awarded and I requested a copy of the thesis in Oct. 1998,
the Hopkins School of Public Health, and the secretary to Dr. Matanoski's
office told me that theses were available to "outsiders" even after a degree
had been awarded.

What concerns me most is that Johns Hopkins spokespersons including medical
spokespersons from the Hopkins Hospital [specifically Dr. Mark Richardson,
head of the ENT Dept., and Hopkins' designated spokesperson on NRI health
risks], not just Public Affairs representatives from the Hopkins School of
Public Health, are issuing written statements saying there is "no consistently
demonstrated health risk" from NRI. These denials of health effects are being
issued when both their own, and larger published studies in the Netherlands
about NRI health effects on children [See Verduijn, 1996 -REAP bibliograpy]
contradicts Hopkins' evasive and dismissive statements.

No consistently demonstrated health risk as stated by Dr. Richardson? Hardly. 
Studies of NRI treated children by Hopkins [see Yeh, 1997; and Sandler, 1978]
document in part:

1) A RR of  thyroid disease [Graves Disease]  of 8.6, p = 0.01 [judged  in
1978 to be highly statistically significant and deserving of follow-up study]-
Not followed up until 20 years later 

2) An overall doubling of benign and malignant tumors of the head and neck
[per Sandler, 1978]

3) An adjusted RR for benign and malignant brain tumors of 30.9, a RR for
thyroid cancer of 4.2 [per Yeh, 1997]

4) Salivary gland cancer - 3 cases observed in the NRI treated group, with 0
in the control group having twice the size. Salivary gland cancers are
generally presumed radiation induced being so rare otherwise. [see Yeh, 1997]

4) A statistically significant doubling of cancer incidence for all sites in
the body [per Verduijn, 1996 -the largest study of NRI ever conducted, 4 times
larger study cohort than the Yeh, 1997 research. Also, the Verduijn, 1996
cohort had average radium doses 3.5 times lower than US treatment protocol.
This makes the  findings of overall cancer incidence increase by Verduijn,
1996 [doubled at a dose 3.5 times lower than in the US] in the Netherlands
even more disturbing.

Regards & best wishes,

Stewart Farber, MS Public Health
Director - Radium Experiment Assessment Project [REAP]
Consulting Scientist
Public Health Sciences
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