[ RadSafe ] Re: Radiation Hormesis

[Brennan, Mike (DOH)]

Concerning "Socialism is not just an expansion of government.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism and
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9109587
  Rather, it is "movement" in which distribution of wealth is
distributed to members of the society."

To be fair, Capitalism is also a "movement" in which wealth is
distributed to members of the society, too.  One of the fundamental
differences is that in a Capitalist system wealth obtained through
ownership is considered superior to money obtained through working
(which is why I am taxed at a different rate for my salary versus money
I gain on my investments).  Another difference between Capitalism and
the various centralized systems it the belief that the net result of the
many positive-feedback cycles in an economy will provide greater wealth
production (usually true) and will keep any one faction from becoming so
dominant as to be able to control the market (often not true).  It rests
on foundation assumptions that there is a limited amount of property,
which makes it valuable, and an unlimited amount of labor (or nearly
so), which makes it of little value.

If you wish to dismiss books about the excesses of industry because they
are written by Socialist then you must also dismiss books about the
excesses of regulation if they are written by Capitalists for the same
reason.

To bring this back to radiation in general and hormesis in particular, I
strongly believe that whenever possible decisions should be based on
strong evidence, and when that is not possible they should be based on
as deep an understanding of the situation as possible.  I do not feel it
is justified to dismiss someone's argument because they are "an
activist" or "from industry" or "a regulator", as none of these
eliminate the possibility that the argument is sound, even if it agrees
with that person's underlying position.  If, however, the person's
argument is weak because they decline to include anything that disagrees
with their position, I find it hard to take the rest of their argument
seriously.