The article highlighted on the June 13, 1956 front-page of the New York Times was the product of demonstrable science fraud committed by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). 43 more words1956 National Academy of Sciences report on radiation risk discovered to be science fraud — JunkScience.com
No, Radiation Doesn’t Cause Gene Mutations – JunkScience.com
The illustration below is from the December 1953 issue of Mechanix Illustrated. So where did people get the still-never-demonstrated idea that radiation could cause genetic mutations, if not mutant beings? You can trace it all back radiation-scare fraudster Herman Muller and his bogus 1927 paper in Science magazine, “Artificial Transmutation of the Gene,” which led…No, radiation doesn’t cause gene mutations — JunkScience.com
Latest EPA science transparency proposal leaked to NYTimes; Key air quality junk science to be banned unless data is made public — JunkScience.com
Here it is. Please review and send me your thoughts. Supposedly this is what will be sent to the White House for review and approval. This is my favorite part so far: If true, this would mean the the Harvard Six City and Pope ACS studies are history and won’t be used by EPA again.…
via Latest EPA science transparency proposal leaked to NYTimes; Key air quality junk science to be banned unless data is made public — JunkScience.com
EPA is cleaning up its act with new, science-based, transparent data that can be verified and replicated by independent researchers. No one should object to better data methods unless they want to block advances in science or support embedded myths of environmentalism. The Harvard Six City study was begun in 1974 and followed participants for 15 years. It used questionnaire type surveys of participants and followed up with spirometry testing and death dates/causes. Death rate only varied by 2 years for most and least polluted cities, which could be a statistical fluke. It has been 40 years since the study was ended, so confidentiality should not be a problem, except to redact names.
This new proposed ruling by the EPA, along with ending the Linear No Threshhold method of risk determination should be celebrated in the scientific and medical communities. It means more research, not less, and more accurate data overall.