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

Sandy Perle sandyfl at
Wed Apr 12 11:34:33 CDT 2006

On 12 Apr 2006 at 18:10, Franz Schönhofer wrote:

Let me just start off by saying that Franz assumes too much when he 
makes conclusions regarding what I read, what my opinions are, and 
ultimately what I post.

> A very good example are the two recent comments by Sandy Perle. First of
> all it seems that he - like so many others - does not read the postings of
> most other RADSAFErs. John Jacobus has pointed to the IAEA website as
> information on the findings of the International Team on the Chernobyl
> Forum quite a long time ago and many more information on scientific
> treatment of the Chernobyl accident is readily available on RADSAFE. 

Julian asked about a link to reports, and I reported such website. 
Besides that, what is Franz's point here? The IAEA posted reports on 
their website. I simply reported on the NCRP Meeting where IAEA 
representatives were also presenters at the meeting. Again, what is 
your point regarding John's posting about IAEA?
> More annoying is that Sandy Perle has obviously really read neither the
> posting by Norman Cohen nor the newspaper article he forwarded - or should
> I suspect that he did not understand it? The article clearly stated, that
> "During the past decade approximately 40.000 cleanup workers have died."
> It was not stated that they died from radiation. So what, Sandy???? How
> much is mortality in the former USSR? Hopefully you understand the other
> messages on RADSAFE on that topic. 

And what do you think the point was in reporting 40,000 clean-up 
workers died? You don't see the implication here? Why not mention all 
the workers in Russia who died and not just report the local deaths?

As far as your last sentence Franz, I really would be interested in 
what precipitated this attack on my ability to understand Radsafe 

> Further Sandy Perle writes on April 12, that according to the Chernobyl
> Forum Report "up to 4 000 COULD eventually die. They haven't yet..." How
> cynical and obscene! Should they die faster in order to fit Mr. Perles
> queer "statistic"? Or would he allow them to live a few more years? He
> also writes that "40,000 clean-up workers did NOT die". How does he know?
> See the other comments. Disgusting!

These are not my conclusions. I only posted what was not only written 
by others, but presented at the NCRP Meeting. The post simply states 
there is the POTENTIAL for up to 4,000 deaths. Again, what is your 
point? What is this reference to my statistic? It's not my number. 
It's a conclusion reached by others, who obviously may or may not fit 
into Franz's acceptable description of an expert. Obviously I am not, 
nor have I stated such. And Franz, you agree that 40,000 have died? 
You discount my comment that they have not (based on other more 
knowlegable individuals). What is your evidence that they HAVE died, 
and not potentially would die. What is your statistic?

> I am as well very impressed, that Sandy Perle attended an NRCP meeting in
> DC with the focus on Chernobyl. I have personally been involved in WHO and
> many IAEA meetings on that topic. Even more interesting that "the
> presenters included the most knowlegable from USA, Russia and other
> countries, where real data were presented." As should be well known, the
> contamination from the Chernobyl NPP affected first of all the Ukraine,
> even more Bjelorussia and most of all certain parts of Western Europe,
> others being spared because no precipitation occurred. (My home country
> Austria was the most affected one.) So where did your "most knowledgable
> experts from the USA" come from and who were they? The USA was practically
> not affected at all, except control of imports. What could Russian
> scientists say about the far, far away Chernobyl accident? Should you
> really not know the political and geographical facts? National Geographic
> always complains about the very low knowledge of people of the USA on
> geographic questions. And what about "presenting real data"? You can find
> them almost "everywhere", if you only bother to search (search engines)
> for them. 

You want to know whom I refer to? Easy, just check the NCRP website 
for a list of all the presenters.

> Another question is of course whether the Vice President of a Dosimetry
> Company is the right person to comment on the Chernobyl accident and
> nuclear power. 

Oh really! Now you're trying to censor me! I didn't realize there is 
a litmus test here on Radsafe. As far as my ability to post what I 
want whenever I want, I suppose my 22 years in NPP doesn't count for 
Franz. I think it allows me to address the NPP option, and what I 
believe is out to destroy that option, such as the Un-Plug posts.

> I understand the criticism of other RADSAFErs.

I don't think that you understand anything at all when it comes to 
this criticism.

Sandy Perle
Senior Vice President, Technical Operations
Global Dosimetry Solutions, Inc.
2652 McGaw Avenue
Irvine, CA 92614 

Tel: (949) 296-2306 / (888) 437-1714  Extension 2306
Fax:(949) 296-1144

E-Mail: sperle at
E-Mail: sandyfl at 

Global Dosimetry Website: 
Personal Website: 

More information about the RadSafe mailing list