[ RadSafe ] Another Letter to the Editor about DU

[John R Johnson]

I agree with Chris
 _________________
John R Johnson, Ph.D.
*****
President, IDIAS, Inc
4535 West 9-Th Ave
Vancouver B. C.
V6R 2E2
(604) 222-9840
idias at interchange.ubc.ca
*****
or most mornings
Consultant in Radiation Protection
TRIUMF
4004 Wesbrook Mall
Vancouver B. C.
V6R 2E2
(604) 222-1047 Ext. 6610
Fax: (604) 222-7309
johnsjr at triumf.ca

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl]On
Behalf Of Clayton, Christopher
Sent: August 9, 2005 10:09 AM
To: radsafe at radlab.nl
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] Another Letter to the Editor about DU


Bob,

    I appreciate your posts on the subject matter.  IMHO, I'd say keep it
up.

Chris Clayton

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On Behalf
Of bobcherry at cox.net
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 12:20 PM
To: radsafe at radlab.nl
Subject: [ RadSafe ] Another Letter to the Editor about DU

Radsafers,

Some you have privately expressed support when I tell you of another anti-DU
article in the media. Some of you have privately asked me to stop sending
such notes to Radsafe. I would like to know what is preferred: to keep this
to myself or let you know what the activists are saying about DU and my
occassional responses.

Pushing on, here is the web address for an opionion piece by Lauren Moret in
today's Battle Creek Enquirer:

http://www.battlecreekenquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050809/OPINI
ON02/508090332/1014/OPINION

Here is my response to the editor:
===========
Dear Editor:

I will make this short with regard to the Lauren Moret-written opinion piece
you published on August 9, "Depleted uranium is WMD": The column is a
flat-out misrepresentating, mistake-ridden, anti-war anti-nuke propagandist
tirade from the start (Lauren Moret "is an international expert on depleted
uranium") to the end ("Cancer starts with one alpha particle under the right
conditions") and for virtually everything in between.

Opinions are fine, but one should support her arguments with the truth and
the facts. Moret did neither, as anyone can easily verify. Since her
arguments have no scientific merit and no support within the responsible
scientific community, she did not support her premise.

I wonder why you printed it. How did it come to you? Do you always publish
opinion columns that purport to be scientific without a minimum of
fact-checking?

Robert N. Cherry, Jr., PhD (physics, University of Michigan)
Certified Health Physicist
Colonel, U.S. Army (retired)
============

Bob C

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/
_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/