[ RadSafe ] Re:Reasonable risk?

[Jerry Cohen]

John,
     I don't understand what "toxins" have to do with it. In Industrial Hygiene, as long as any exposure is below the TLV level, no action to further reduce it is necessary. So, let me rephrase my question. In radiation safety, is there any level of exposure so low that action to further reduce it can be considered unwarrented?
   
  
John Jacobus <crispy_bird at yahoo.com> wrote:
  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" 
> To: "Sandy Perle" ;
> ; "Flanigan,
> Floyd" ; "Michael Bohan"
> ;
> ; "John Jacobus"
> 
> 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