Lung Cancer Rate Near Rocketdyne

Re “High Lung Cancer Rate Found Near Rocketdyne,” April 17.

It is hard to believe that a 17% larger than average lung cancer rate near Rocketdyne is deemed significant and a cause for alarm and a misleading headline.

First, as you state (although buried deeply in the article), the study was not controlled for smoking, radon and other possible causes.

Second, in most literature I’ve read about cancer “clusters,” scientists require increases of several hundred percent or more before they consider them significant. This is just common sense--nature is not homogeneous. Look at the sky at night. Are the stars laid out in a uniform pattern with the same density in all areas? Are the wildflowers in a meadow spread out evenly? Not likely.

Your headline was irresponsible journalism. Information presented later in the article shows that your adjective “high” clearly has not been proven. Lately, you’ve been campaigning strongly against illiteracy in your articles and editorials. Perhaps a war against innumeracy and bad science is required as well.

I realize it’s tough to look at cold hard numbers about an emotional issue such as cancer, but the scientific method has proven time and again that, in the end, it produces the best cure.

TOM SELLA

Port Hueneme