[ RadSafe ] Re:Reasonable risk?

[John Jacobus]

Jerry,
As an industrial hygienist, how would you answer this
question with the toxins you have to consider?

--- jjcohen at prodigy.net wrote:

> John,
>     The obvious presumption of this question is that
> somehow the worker
> needs to be  better protected. What's the basis for
> this presumption?
> Jerry Cohen
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Sandy Perle" <sandyfl at earthlink.net>
> To: "Sandy Perle" <sandyfl at earthlink.net>;
> <jjcohen at prodigy.net>; "Flanigan,
> Floyd" <Floyd.Flanigan at nmcco.com>; "Michael Bohan"
> <mike.bohan at yale.edu>;
> <radsafe at radlab.nl>; "John Jacobus"
> <crispy_bird at yahoo.com>
> Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 10:56 AM
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Re:Reasonable risk?
> 
> 
> > On 21 Apr 2006 at 10:20, John Jacobus wrote:
> >
> > > How do you determine how better to protect the
> > > worker.  Do you go with days-lost-on-the-job or
> mrem?
> >
> > John,
> 
> 


+++++++++++++++++++
"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