Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 49
  1. #1

  2. #2
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    7,743
    Well lets just wait until that article gets published. There's always room for interpretation on any scientific study, especially when we're talking about epidemiology. One thing that quickly came to mind is the I-131 levels for Salt Lake, Boise, etc. Although high, what were they before Fukushima? Maybe those locations always had high, endogenous levels of the isotope. And what is the basis to correlate infant mortality in the U.S. with the radiation cloud from Fukushima? Epidemiology and cause and effect is a tricky mine field. I'm sure the article addresses these issues, I'm curious to see the raw data and the methodology before reaching any conclusions. 14,000 deaths in 14 months sounds like a large number to me so the red flags on this are going up in my mind.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Supermoto Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    54
    Wait a second. Aren't you the same guy who posted that we had all better watch out how we use Neti Pots because we could die from a brain-eating amoeba?

    I'm thinking you should step away from the computer and go out for a ride. Maybe I should too.

    Life is too short to worry about some stuff (but not Neti Pots- or Fukushima-short).

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Danke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    537
    Researchers Trumpet Another Flawed Fukushima Death Study | Observations, Scientific American Blog Network
    As long as the netti pot (chuckle) amoebas aren't exposed to radiation we should all be fine.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Blurr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,342
    Quote Originally Posted by Supermoto Fan View Post
    Wait a second. Aren't you the same guy who posted that we had all better watch out how we use Neti Pots because we could die from a brain-eating amoeba?

    I'm thinking you should step away from the computer and go out for a ride. Maybe I should too.

    Life is too short to worry about some stuff (but not Neti Pots- or Fukushima-short).
    sigh, yes I mean god forbid people make informed decisions about their own lives. But at no place did I say we could all die, I merely stated it is a good Idea to boil your water. thank you for trying to make that thread into something that it was not.
    Why would you possibly want to be aware of something negative? Obviously a all the radiation being pumped (still) into the Atmosphere and into the water is good for you isnt it? Maybe if you *******s quit being dickbags and we all got together we could put our energy forward and push our useless politicians to actually do something positive. or you can try to stomp your feet, close your eyes, and hope it all goes away.

  6. #6
    banned
    Reputation: Spinning Lizard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,487
    I once stepped in dog poo, will I be OK?

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Blurr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,342
    Quote Originally Posted by Danke View Post
    Researchers Trumpet Another Flawed Fukushima Death Study | Observations, Scientific American Blog Network
    As long as the netti pot (chuckle) amoebas aren't exposed to radiation we should all be fine.
    And thus is the problem, on one side you have people trying to inform others, on the other you have people arguing over any minor thing they possibly can. But hey, maybe you and Ann coulter could go help the clean up in Japan, I mean you are a hero and all right ?
    My brother in Law died from throat cancer from working on the beloved Nevada Test site, but hey, the government told him it was safe too. Believe what you choose, but do not mock those of us who seek to be informed and to try to make the planet a better place.

  8. #8
    Rep Power: Infinity
    Reputation: NateHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,621
    Quote Originally Posted by Danke View Post
    Researchers Trumpet Another Flawed Fukushima Death Study | Observations, Scientific American Blog Network
    As long as the netti pot (chuckle) amoebas aren't exposed to radiation we should all be fine.
    Thanks for that article, which conveniently links to the original study.

    http://www.radiation.org/reading/pubs/HS42_1F.pdf

    Reading through it, how in the hell did that **** get published? That journal is CLEARLY not peer-reviewed. I found this lovely tidbit in there:

    Statistical significance between the 2010 and 2011 death trends was calculated
    by using the difference between two means.
    Really? I want to know how that is a test for statistical significance!

    Oddly enough, they put their actual statistical test in the appendix. WTF is that doing in the appendix and not in the body? Why is the z-score not included in the results?

    Appendix Table 4
    Calculation of significance of differences in 2010 and 2011 deaths
    For example, in Table 2, the number of deaths rose 4.46%, from 148,395 to 155,015,
    from weeks 1225 in 2010 versus 2011. This compared with a 2.34% increase from the
    prior 14-week periods. The significance of difference between the two means (+2.34%
    vs. +4.46%) was calculated using a t-test.
    The formula (O E)/SQRT (mean12 + mean22) was used, assuming
    O = observed increase (1.0446)
    E = expected increase (1.0234)
    N1 = number of deaths for weeks 1225, 2011
    N2 = number of deaths for weeks 5011, 2011
    Mean1 = 1/(SQRT N1) O = 1/(SQRT 155,015) 1.0446 = 0.002653
    Mean2 = 1/(SQRT N2) E = 1/(SQRT 148,395) 1.0234 = 0.002657
    The computations yield 0.0212/0.0037148, or a z-score of 5.71, which converts to a
    p value of < 0.000001 in any basic statistics table, meaning there is less than a 1 in
    1,000,000 chance that the difference occurred due to random chance.
    And seeing what they did there, still doesn't make sense. They looked at NUMBERS of deaths. Did they care to standardize those numbers somehow? The total numbers of deaths could simply have increased due to a change in the total population, which they aren't taking into account.

    My favorite, however, comes from their references list.

    Fong, P. Sudden infant deaths on rise in B.C. Toronto Star, July 6, 2011. www.the
    star.com/news/canada/article/1020924-sudden-infant-deaths-on-rise-in-b-c (accessed
    August 4, 2011).
    A newspaper article? Really? Cited in a "scholarly" journal article?

    The Scientific American article pointed out that the author of the paper is an anti-nuclear energy activist so I sought to dig up some details on the guy. I went to the homepage of the "journal" that published his paper, and went to the journal page.

    Nuclink: Journal of Current Radiation and Public Health Issues

    So the PI is the editor, eh? No wonder that **** got published. I see his professional certifications include a master's of public health and a master's of business administration. No wonder his paper is sketchy with regards to rigorous statistical analysis. He probably lacks training in that area.

    An interesting bit of bio info on the guy:

    Joseph J. Mangano, MPH, MBA - Alternative Energy - ProCon.org

    I turned up this really nice critique of the paper, too. It shows some REAL statistics and links to other critiques of the paper, too.

    Shame on you, Janette Sherman and Joseph Mangano! Nuclear Power? Yes Please

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Scott O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,327
    Quote Originally Posted by Spinning Lizard View Post
    I once stepped in dog poo, will I be OK?
    As long as you didn't snort it through your neti pot, you should be ok. You didn't do that, did you!?!?!

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Danke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    537
    Quote Originally Posted by Blurr View Post
    And thus is the problem, on one side you have people trying to inform others, on the other you have people arguing over any minor thing they possibly can. But hey, maybe you and Ann coulter could go help the clean up in Japan, I mean you are a hero and all right ?
    My brother in Law died from throat cancer from working on the beloved Nevada Test site, but hey, the government told him it was safe too. Believe what you choose, but do not mock those of us who seek to be informed and to try to make the planet a better place.
    I don't think I'd get along with Ann etc. I base my life on reality.

  11. #11
    AZ
    AZ is offline
    banned
    Reputation: AZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    19,996
    Quote Originally Posted by Spinning Lizard View Post
    I once stepped in dog poo, will I be OK?
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott O View Post
    As long as you didn't snort it through your neti pot, you should be ok. You didn't do that, did you!?!?!




    Yeah, you got to snort that sh it off the bottom of your shoe.

  12. #12
    007
    007 is offline
    b a n n e d
    Reputation: 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    5,392
    100% complete and total pseudo-science, at best. I am a published author and reviewer for several peer-reviewed publications and I assure you, that did not go through the traditional scientific process.

    What's worse is that the WSJ is doing their part to contribute to the internet fearmongering.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Blurr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,342
    Quote Originally Posted by NateHawk View Post
    Thanks for that article, which conveniently links to the original study.

    http://www.radiation.org/reading/pubs/HS42_1F.pdf

    Reading through it, how in the hell did that **** get published? That journal is CLEARLY not peer-reviewed. I found this lovely tidbit in there:



    Really? I want to know how that is a test for statistical significance!

    Oddly enough, they put their actual statistical test in the appendix. WTF is that doing in the appendix and not in the body? Why is the z-score not included in the results?



    And seeing what they did there, still doesn't make sense. They looked at NUMBERS of deaths. Did they care to standardize those numbers somehow? The total numbers of deaths could simply have increased due to a change in the total population, which they aren't taking into account.

    My favorite, however, comes from their references list.



    A newspaper article? Really? Cited in a "scholarly" journal article?

    The Scientific American article pointed out that the author of the paper is an anti-nuclear energy activist so I sought to dig up some details on the guy. I went to the homepage of the "journal" that published his paper, and went to the journal page.

    Nuclink: Journal of Current Radiation and Public Health Issues

    So the PI is the editor, eh? No wonder that **** got published. I see his professional certifications include a master's of public health and a master's of business administration. No wonder his paper is sketchy with regards to rigorous statistical analysis. He probably lacks training in that area.

    An interesting bit of bio info on the guy:

    Joseph J. Mangano, MPH, MBA - Alternative Energy - ProCon.org

    I turned up this really nice critique of the paper, too. It shows some REAL statistics and links to other critiques of the paper, too.

    Shame on you, Janette Sherman and Joseph Mangano! Nuclear Power? Yes Please
    Good thing you dont do as much riding as you should





    Good post though.

  14. #14
    Rep Power: Infinity
    Reputation: NateHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,621
    Quote Originally Posted by Blurr View Post
    Good thing you dont do as much riding as you should





    Good post though.
    sitting on my ass in my office doing my own data analysis. the only riding I'm doing lately is commuting. haven't been on the mtb in at least a month.

  15. #15
    Frt Range, CO
    Reputation: pursuiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,461
    Quote Originally Posted by Blurr View Post
    ...My brother in Law died from throat cancer from working on the beloved Nevada Test site....
    Oral sex with a partner who has genital warts?

    Oral Sex May Cause More Throat Cancer Than Smoking in Men, Researchers Say- Bloomberg

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Blurr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,342
    Quote Originally Posted by pursuiter View Post
    Why do you have this problem?


    PM sent, feel free to take me up on it if you are in my area, I doubt you have any balls however.

  17. #17
    Hi.
    Reputation: jtmartino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,869
    Quote Originally Posted by Blurr View Post

    Good post though.
    It was a great post. And no offense, but the article it references is complete and utter sh*t.

    Not everyone has the background to discern what is scientific research and what is crappy meta-analysis, which sucks because big media will publish anything sensational. TL1 also does a good job of posting one-sided crap that serves his personal beliefs without actually analyzing the studies.

    Great job, NateHawk. And thanks Blurr for calling stuff out like this, it's always good to have people paying attention out there .

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CarolinaLL6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,083
    Quote Originally Posted by Blurr View Post
    PM sent, feel free to take me up on it if you are in my area, I doubt you have any balls however.
    You got trolled then you PM him that?

  19. #19
    AZ
    AZ is offline
    banned
    Reputation: AZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    19,996
    In the bin, why am I so surprised?

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Blurr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,342
    Reality bothers most people, Chernobyl was contained in ten days months later fuku still is not, but hey we do pretty good treating leukemia now days so what the hell. Back to discussing if we have to many gadgets and other important stuff.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Blurr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,342
    Quote Originally Posted by CarolinaLL6 View Post
    You got trolled then you PM him that?
    Watching someone die from cancer is pretty horrible and there is quit a bit of emotion on my end over this, so yea I got trolled but then again honor is more than just a word to me.

  22. #22
    AZ
    AZ is offline
    banned
    Reputation: AZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    19,996
    Quote Originally Posted by Blurr View Post
    Reality bothers most people, Chernobyl was contained in ten days months later fuku still is not, but hey we do pretty good treating leukemia now days so what the hell. Back to discussing if we have to many gadgets and other important stuff.


    I was not taking shots at you, just a bit of commentary on the trajectory of the thread. I largely agree with with your basic premise, but arguing it is not going to convert anyone. I live among many "down winders" I am very familiar with effects of nuclear testing and the human toll it produced. Keep on keepin on. Merry Christmas to all.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Blurr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,342
    I know az you seem like a solid guy, I admit I laughed at down winders, have a good Christmas as well.

  24. #24
    "2 Wycked"
    Reputation: crazy03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,076
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott O View Post
    As long as you didn't snort it through your neti pot, you should be ok. You didn't do that, did you!?!?!
    First you need to boil the sh*t and then you can sniff it through your neti pot.

  25. #25
    Rep Power: Infinity
    Reputation: NateHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,621
    Quote Originally Posted by Blurr View Post
    Reality bothers most people, Chernobyl was contained in ten days months later fuku still is not, but hey we do pretty good treating leukemia now days so what the hell. Back to discussing if we have to many gadgets and other important stuff.
    I can provide a little bit of insight about leukemia treatments

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Wall Street Journal article on Flow Trails
    By Woodman in forum North & South Carolina
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-30-2011, 10:44 AM
  2. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-10-2008, 09:15 PM
  3. Medial Tendonitis
    By phoehn9111 in forum Rider Down, injuries and recovery
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-12-2008, 08:30 PM
  4. Demolition Medial Cranks
    By maximum.minimum in forum Urban/DJ/Park
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-27-2007, 09:15 PM
  5. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-11-2006, 08:58 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •