[ RadSafe ] FW: [UnplugSalem] Fw: Chernobyl 20 year later

JGinniver at aol.com JGinniver at aol.com
Tue Apr 11 18:15:31 CDT 2006

many thank for the link.
I don't disagree with your views.  To be honest the extrapolation of  
individual doses below public dose limits into large collective doses is  something I 
disagree with.  If I had the time I would like to estimate the  collective 
dose from Air Travel and point out how many additional deaths are  going to 
result from people flying to their holiday destinations.  It is  equally as valid 
as the estimates of deaths from exposures from other  sources.
However, as the methodologies employed by the authors of this report are  
based on excepted principles I think it is important that we look at their  
reasoning for selecting, for example, higher releases of certain radionuclies,  or 
worst case dose estimates for the intakes that may have resulted from these  
releases.  Where we think they have been unduly pessimistic we should  put 
forward counter arguments that are clear, concise and easily  understood.  If we 
are simply dismissive we risk being seen as part of a  conspiracy to cover up 
the consequences of the accident.
Now I have the IAEA/WHO report I hope to be able to see why they chose to  
base their assessment on different values to the ones selected in the  
Fairlie/Sumner report.
Warmest regards,

More information about the RadSafe mailing list