[ RadSafe ] LNT= "practical" regulation? CT

howard long hflong at pacbell.net
Thu Mar 16 11:36:28 CST 2006

  Yearly, 10rem whole body CT is advocated by my friend Gerald Looney, MD PhD (radiology), who credits it with saving his life (from renal cancer removed early),
  as he indicated on Radsafe a year ago. It has not been as convenient or economical for me yet.  Howard 
John Jacobus <crispy_bird at yahoo.com> wrote:
  Dr. Long,
Are you taking 10 rem CT scans every year?

--- howard long wrote:

> Closer analogy than air pollution regulation (and
> I considered being LA Public Health AP Control
> Officer 45 years ago) should be radiation in the
> wave length of ultra violet.
> Like ionizing radiation and unlike air pollution,
> UV is not visible or smellable, but burns in high
> dosage (sunburn and sunlamp overexposure) but is
> needed in lower dosage (vitamin D absorbtion to
> prevent osteoporosis, etc).
> Regulators, stop your lazy, frightening, horribly
> expensive, nuclear power inhibiting LNT fraud and
> expedite anything (like full-body CT scan) up to 10
> rem/year!
> Howard Long MD MPH
> Bernard Cohen wrote:
> Franz Schönhofer wrote:
> >John, as usual I agree with you. The LNT is a
> valuable tool for Radiation
> >Protection Legislation - if not the only one
> acceptable and administrable. 
> > 
> >
> I hardily disagree with this statement, as explained
> in my note in 
> the Bulletin of Canadian Nuclear Society a few years
> ago:
> The alternative is to treat radiation as we treat
> chemical 
> pollutants. Using air pollution as an example, we
> limit concentrations 
> of SO2, nitrogen oxides, particulates, ozone, etc.

More information about the RadSafe mailing list