[ RadSafe ] Yucca Mountain / o.4 Sv extra radiation over 10 years.... / Miller and McClain, 2007

James Salsman BenjB4 at gmail.com
Sat Jul 5 05:10:06 CDT 2008

Dan McCarn wrote:

> Mike Brennan has sufficiently answered your question....

No, Mike's answer of "zero" is wrong and foolish.  He hasn't even
begun to enumerate all of the ways spent fuel has entered the
environment.  For example, that answer also omits this:


> I tend to believe that you offer your seeming ignorance as part of a ruse....

Ha!  You accuse me of feigned ignorance but neither you nor anyone
else has been able to offer an accurate figure for the rate at which
spent fuel has and is expected to enter the environment.

> This was one of my IAEA projects back in the 80s in the
> IAEA's Division of Nuclear Fuel Cycle to characterize all
> non-reactor nuclear fuel cycle facilities in the world.

Then why are you unable to state a number?

Rainer Facius wrote:

> not a single of the references you provided addresses HERITABLE effects?

Incorrect.  As Dr. Cedervall almost correctly pointed out: "A
teratogen may also, but not necessarily, be a _mutagen_ and therefore
could give heritable ... defects"
http://lists.radlab.nl/pipermail/radsafe/2008-July/010513.html  (His
"necessarily" part is wrong -- a mutagen is a mutagen and a
teratogenic mutagen has the mechanism of action in the germ cells.)
The Miller and McClain 2007 review clearly indicate mutations and
other chromosome aberrations, and their findings have been adopted by
the U.S. National Research Council:


Roy Herren wrote:

> Have you publicly apologized as of yet to Dr. Franta for having contacted his company's CEO?

Why?  If someone accused you of trying to help terrorists, would you
magically lose your right to free association and speech?  Would you
magically lose your right to complain to the accuser's management?
What does it say about an industry that speaking with an employer in a
situation like that is frowned on?

Steven Dapra wrote:

> According to McDiarmid et al., so few chromosomal aberrations were
> found that they couldn't perform linear regression on them.

What do you think the relation is between the ability to perform
linear regression and confirmation of their existence?

>  it has become patently obvious to me that you *can't* read reports.

Steve, three months ago you were trying to convince us that uranyl
wasn't teratogenic.  How long do you intend to keep playing the fool?
If you have a problem with the way Miller and McClain characterized
McDairmid's results, please email or phone her at her office.  She is
on Eastern time and returning from her vacation on Monday.

James Salsman

More information about the RadSafe mailing list