Cliff Sloan Pago 2 2 June 6, 1°80 Yhere are inner scientific inconsistencies in this paper. For example, on page 1 the authors state: °. . . the only potential health effects are the induction of cancer among the exposed ‘population anc the induction of genetic effects . . . «* On page 13 they admit: “. . . mutations cell that has a nuclous . . .* and on effects of ionizing radiation, cancer Sreatest concern.” The porulation of may be induced in any body page 18: "Of the somatic induction is that of Enewetak ftell has the right to know that a value judgment has been made for then, namely, ‘that induction of cancer is their only concern. They may, if informed about hypothyroidism, aplastic anemia, premature aging, benign tumors and other such disorders, mace a diffurent judgment. They alsu have the right to know that radiation is a promoter of cancer which ia induced b, other environmental factors. The lack of expertise in biocatatisties is evident in Bender and Brill’s use of averaging. For example, on page 4 they intgeduce a SO-year dose commitment so as to "reduce" average yearly dose of radiation... It is well known that most of the arenesSe in question doliver their dose in a relatively short Cine. for example, delivers its SO-year dose commitment in the first’ two years, On pase 5, they “reduced” the radiation cose of the ingabitants of Enjebi by averaging in the population less exposed, This is like telling onc member of a family his or her risk of lung cancer is lowered if the other nonamoking mexbers of the family arc included and an “average” risk given. It is a scientifically ridiculous approach to public health! sf On page 7, the authors compare the radiation dose received by the population of the Colorn¢o Plateau with the agdeg doses to be received by the people of Enjebi. In a recent survey of gamma radlation anomelics (OR-73), out of 6,253 high readings reported for Colorado, only 453, or 13.0%, were cue to natural radioactivity. This Coes not include the problems in Grand Junction, Colorado, where 14,542 high camma readings were made. There has been a remedial prograz in Grand Junction since 1972 under Public Law 92-314, The authors of the Enewetak position paper might botter call for federal ansistanca for the people of Celeraco, than call for increasing exposura to tha population of Enewetak by a factor of 5,6 to match another polluted or high-risk area: