[ RadSafe ] Re:Reasonable risk?

Fri Apr 21 08:38:36 CDT 2006

Jerry,
I certainly have no way of knowing if you actions are
reasonable.  Do you talk on your cell phone while
driving a car?  Do you wash your hands after working
with chemicals?  As a Industrial Hygienist, do you
require workers to wear protective equipment, that
cost money, follow procedures that take time, and give
training class?  Is that not ALARA?  

You may think that ALARA is absurd, but in principle
we practice it every day.  If a worker handles arsenic
or a biological agent, are you saying the protective
equipment and good work procedures are a waste of time
and money?  The LNT has nothing to do with these
issues, despite your efforts to make that argument.  

--- jjcohen at prodigy.net wrote:

> John,
>     All of my decisions and actions are reasonable.
> I am not so sure about
> yours-- and, other peoples decisions have been
> really bad.
>     The point I have tried to make in this
> discussion is that  ALARA is a
> basically absurd concept, because what is or isn't
> reasonable is largely in
> the eye of the beholder. Consequently, ALARA
> decisions can, and have been
> arbitrary in nature.
> Many years ago (1969), in an attempt to resolve this
> problem, I suggested
> placing a monetary value on the benefit of avoiding
> radiation dose levels
> [and was severely criticized for trying to "place a
> price on human life"].
> Since then, several other attempts were made to do
> the same thing(i.e.,
> $1000/man-rem). Some regulatory decisions (ie, EPA
> site cleanup guidance)
> have reflected  apparent values exceeding $1
> million/person/rem). In any
> case, ALARA decisions remain largely arbitrary in
> nature and, as a result,
> many ridiculous decisions can and have been made.
>     Even if one accepts the LNT hypothesis, ALARA
> guidance is essentially no
> guidance, since just about any action can be
> justified as being ALARA if one
> places a high enough value on dose avoidance. 
> Without LNT, the absurdity of
> ALARA should be obvious.
> Jerry
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "John Jacobus" <crispy_bird at yahoo.com>
> To: <jjcohen at prodigy.net>; "Flanigan, Floyd"
> <Floyd.Flanigan at nmcco.com>;
> "Michael Bohan" <mike.bohan at yale.edu>;
> <radsafe at radlab.nl>
> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 12:40 PM
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Re:Reasonable risk?
> 
> 
> > Jerry,
> > Health physicist like me are not dense.  However,
> we
> > often have to deal with people that are.
> >
> > To me, eating and drinking in laboratories where
> toxic
> > chemicals and biological agents are used is
> > unreasonable.  The IHs at this place let the
> > researchers do it.
> >
> > --- jjcohen at prodigy.net wrote:
> >
> > > It is certainly nice to know that  ALARA policy
> > > recommends that radiation
> > > safety actions be reasonable in nature. I
> personally
> > > believe that ALL human
> > > actions should be reasonable, but that's just my
> > > opinion.  I haven't run
> > > across many advocates for unreasonableness, but
> if I
> > > do, I will cite the
> > > Health Physics ALARA policy to show them how
> things
> > > should be done.
> > > I wonder why Health Physicists are so dense,
> that
> > > they must be continually
> > > reminded to be reasonable.
> > > Jerry Cohen
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > > From: "Flanigan, Floyd"
> <Floyd.Flanigan at nmcco.com>
> > > To: <jjcohen at prodigy.net>; "Michael Bohan"
> > > <mike.bohan at yale.edu>;
> > > <radsafe at radlab.nl>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2006 1:11 PM
> > > Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] In utero dose
> > >
> > >
> > > I beg to differ. ALARA is now a relatively
> universal
> > > concept used by
> > > industry. It is applied to all forms of risk
> whether
> > > radiological or
> > > not. Safety professionals and PRA engineers use
> it
> > > on a regular basis as
> > > well as OSHA in a manner. Any time risk can be
> > > reduced without causing a
> > > detriment it should be done. In the case of
> > > emergency x-ray, of course
> > > it is necessary to take the x-ray in order to
> > > provide proper, possibly
> > > life-saving treatment. That should be a
> > > "no-brainer". A good analogy
> > > would be that a man has a heart attack while
> > > crossing a busy street.
> > > Should you move him or perform CPR in the middle
> of
> > > traffic? The answer,
> > > of course, depends on the severity of the attack
> and
> > > the logistics
> > > involved in controlling traffic safely as well
> as
> > > other factors such as
> > > time of day/traffic flow, distance to nearest
> > > hospital, etc. etc. etc.
> > > Each case will have differing variables which
> will
> > > make the decision
> > > making process unique. It seems as though we are
> > > trying to paint this
> > > one in black and white and in the process are
> > > creating dissention.
> > > Conservative decision making takes into account
> all
> > > of these things and
> > > should be used by all in positions of
> > > responsibility. Right and wrong
> > > are not really applicable in many instances.
> > >
> > > Floyd W. Flanigan B.S.Nuc.H.P.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl
> > > [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On
> > > Behalf Of jjcohen at prodigy.net
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 10:25 PM
> > > To: Michael Bohan; radsafe at radlab.nl
> > > Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] In utero dose
> > >
> > > Michael,
> > >     I am an Industrial Hygienist (CIH), and I
> resent
> > > your attempt to pin
> > > the
> > > ALARA nonsense on  Industrial Hygienists. ALARA
> is
> > > strictly a Health
> > > Physics
> > > invention, which IMHO was designed to justify
> the
> > > application of
> > > absurdly
> > > restrictive controls to operations involving
> > > ionizing radiation.
> > > Jerry Cohen
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > > From: "Michael Bohan" <mike.bohan at yale.edu>
> > > To: <radsafe at radlab.nl>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 3:13 PM
> > > Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] In utero dose
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hello Floyd and RadSafer's:
> > > >
> > > > In medicine, the conservative approach (of
> ALARA
> > > for radiation) is
> > > > usually NOT advisable.  ALARA is specifically
> an
> > > industrial hygiene
> > > > practice that has been bastardized by some to
> > > apply to realms it was
> > > > never intended for.
> > > >
> > > > If there is a pregnant mother, who's been in a
> > > serious car accident,
> > > > the risk of having an undiagnosed condition
> that
> > > results in immediate
> > > > death to the mother and/or fetus, is real.  
> The
> > > theoretical risk of
> > > > even a 10 rad dose to her and the fetus are a
> very
> > > small concern in
> > > > comparison.  Even with a dose of 10 rad, the
> > > theoretical risk to the
> > > > fetus is about 1 in a thousand, and it might
> only
> > > be expressed many
> > > > years later.  However, the mortality of
> mothers
> > > and fetuses from
> > > > serious car accidents and undiagnosed trauma,
> is
> 
=== message truncated ===

+++++++++++++++++++
"A scientist's aim in a discussion with his colleagues is not to persuade, but to clarify." 
Leo Szilard
-- John
John Jacobus, MS
Certified Health Physicist
e-mail:  crispy_bird at yahoo.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 