[ RadSafe ] Excess relative risk: LNT "Shorthand"
crispy_bird at yahoo.com
Sat Feb 16 12:01:42 CST 2008
Extrapolation of data beyond the know data is not that unusual. It is done in science and engineering is frequently done. It works well when the behavior of the observations is consistent. However, biological response to ionizing radiation and other agents frequently at low dose generally does not follow the simple correspondence found at other other dose levels. It is only in the last ten years we have had the tools to do the necessary research.
ALARA and the LNT hypothesis are based on what we knew. They have worked to reduce exposures. New science by reduce the influence of ALARA and the LNT hypothesis, but I would not expect to see any dramatic changes in regulations.
howard long <hflong at pacbell.net> wrote:
Sandy and all,
1, LNT, when extrapolated down beyond the data, is dumb.
It misleads unnecessarily, now that better animal, bomb and natural experiments are available.
It's convenient "shorthand" is used for intolerable, very expensive, over-regulation.
2, ALARA is a good tool, but like a knife, may be used where not "reasonable",
like anti-nukes force on the nuclear power industry to close safe operations and require
removal of beneficial doses in new plants.
----- Original Message ----
From: Sandy Perle
To: howard long ; radsafe at radlab.nl
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 10:01:15 AM
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] Excess relative risk: LNT "Shorthand"
I offer the following points:
1. One can not categorically equate LNT with burdens Nuclear power with dumb regulation, crippling the USA economy
2. As far as this statement, ALARA, which I used for my office x-rays, is simplistic but deadly when applied to the complex facilities needed in a nuclear age and may deprive people from Cameron's "essential trace energy. ALARA is simply a tool that evaluates the radiation work environment, the key emphasis placed on Reasonable, therefore, how can this be defined a being deadly when compared to the complex facilities needed in a nuclear age? ALARA has been around a long time, subsequent to ALAP, and for the most part has worked well. Without a philosophy, or regulatory requirement, there would not have been the progress made, and perhaps, public confidence would not be on the rise. Yes, economics is key to the nuclear renaissance we see, but public confidence drives political thought. If the public were totally against nuclear power, there would be no renaissance.
Sander C. Perle
Mirion Technologies, Inc., Dosimetry Services Division
2652 McGaw Avenue
Irvine, CA 92614
Tel: (949) 296-2306 / (888) 437-1714 Extension 2306
Global Dosimetry Solutions, Inc. http://www.dosimetry.com/
Mirion Technologies, Inc. http://www.mirion.com/
On Behalf Of howard long
"Shorthand" LNT (Jacobus, below) burdens Nuclear power with dumb regulation,
crippling the USA economy.
Should regulators, who impose 10 times the cost and time to build a reactor,
in graphs from Ted Rockwell's book, be allowed to so simplify for their own "shorthand"
convenience? Let them learn calculus instesd of imposing their simple arithmetic.
ALARA, which I used for my office x-rays, is simplistic but deadly when applied to
the complex facilities needed in a nuclear age and may deprive people from
Cameron's "essential trace energy".
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html
For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/
"If history teaches any lesson it is that no nation has an inherent right to greatness. Greatness has to be earned and continually re-earned."
- Norman Augustine, Chairman of the National Academies Committee
John Jacobus, MS
Certified Health Physicist
e-mail: crispy_bird at yahoo.com
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
More information about the RadSafe