[ RadSafe ] HP Position

Wilson, Stanley stanley.l.wilson at emory.edu
Thu May 22 16:42:28 CDT 2008


Emory University is recruiting an EHS II (Sr. HP) to work with our team of professionals. Interested applicants should review the position # 5099 BR at the Emory Careers site:
http://www.emory.jobs/careers/index.html

Job Title EHS Professional II
Job Requisition ID 5099BR
Division School Of Medicine
Department U458000:SOM:Enviro Health & Safety
Full/Part Time Full-Time
Regular/Temporary Regular
Job Description JOB DESCRIPTION: Under general supervision, monitors, controls, inspects, contains or removes hazardous material (biological, chemical, radioactive or other). Provides support to ensure compliance with applicable standards, laws and regulations. Performs surveys and routine safety inspections in the areas of biosafety, chemical safety, radiation safety or industrial hygiene. May participate in project management to facilitate laboratory moves and abatement projects, including coordination with vendors, contractors and internal clients. Maintains storage areas, equipment, and personal protective equipment related to EHS programs. Participates in training for program areas. Responds to internal clients regarding chemical, biosafety, radiation safety and industrial hygiene concerns. Maintains records and prepares reports. Responds to emergency situations involving hazardous materials. Performs related responsibilities as required.
MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS: Bachelors plus 3 years experience in environmental engineering, public health, occupational health and safety or other appropriate science-related field of study (i.e. chemistry) is required. Professional Board Certification desired:  (Examples include: CHMM (Certified Hazardous Materials Manager), PE (Professional Engineer), CIH (Certified Industrial Hygienist), Certified Health Physicist (CHP) or CSP (Certified Safety Professional), BSP (Biosafety Professional). Equivalent combination of experience, education and training is accepted.

DATE CREATED/MODIFIED/REVIEWED: 01/16/08 AMM
Preferred Qualifications Preferred qualifications: Bachelors or Master's degree in health physics or closely related field plus experience detailed above in Broad Scope license activities in academic/medical setting. Professional Board Certification, (CHP, AAPM, ABR), or eligibility for same and OSHA Hazardous Materials technician certification. Working knowledge of current radiation protection regulations and experience in identifying, evaluating and mitigating radiation hazards. Capable of working independently or as part of a team of professionals. Excellent verbal and written communication skills. Experience in making presentations to large and small groups and providing radiation protection training to affected staff. Computer literacy in Office application and radiation safety databases.
Additional Job Details Duties may include:
Under the general supervision of the RSO, conducts a wide variety of health physics services, including performing routine audits of radioactive materials and their use in laboratories, calibration of survey instruments and radiation-producing machinery, bioassays, waste disposal, decommissioning of facilities and emergency response. Conducts personnel dosimetry program including the assignment, distribution, collection and documentation of personnel dosimeters. Ability to work in an operational setting involving lifting, walking and respirator use. Must be licensable to drive in Georgia. Includes occasional weekend duty.
This position involves: Involve working with radioactive materials or devices.
Stan Wilson
Emory Radiation safety


-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On Behalf Of radsafe-request at radlab.nl
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 4:25 PM
To: radsafe at radlab.nl
Subject: radsafe Digest, Vol 147, Issue 4

Send radsafe mailing list submissions to
        radsafe at radlab.nl

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        http://lists.radlab.nl/mailman/listinfo/radsafe
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        radsafe-request at radlab.nl

You can reach the person managing the list at
        radsafe-owner at radlab.nl

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of radsafe digest..."


Important!

To keep threads/discussions more easily readible please observe the following guideline when replying to a message or digest:

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of radsafe digest ... and - rather than enclose an entire
article that you quote only the germane sentence to which you're responding".
_______________________________________________


Today's Topics:

   1. ICRP consultation Application of the Commission's
      Recommendations for the Protection of People in Emergency
      Exposure Situations (Dawson, Fred Mr)
   2. FS: Classic reference books  (Jerry Lahti)
   3. "Switzerland Destroyed Nuclear Smuggling Papers" + links
      (Clayton J Bradt)
   4. RE: uranium smoke is a teratogen (Ben Fore)
   5. RE: uranium smoke is a teratogen (Brennan, Mike  (DOH))
   6. RE: uranium smoke is a teratogen (Doug Aitken)
   7. RE: uranium smoke is a teratogen (Dan W McCarn)
   8. RE: uranium smoke is a teratogen (Brennan, Mike  (DOH))


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 07:51:19 +0100
From: "Dawson, Fred Mr" <Fred.Dawson199 at mod.uk>
Subject: [ RadSafe ] ICRP consultation Application of the Commission's
        Recommendations for the Protection of People in Emergency       Exposure
        Situations
To: <srp-uk at yahoogroups.com>
Cc: radsafe at radlab.nl
Message-ID:
        <WEwyIbj5BlpI8wto8PL5nZ4Ncy7vNowrCE8WebsU at mhbyhvagie.cLU.B.d9j.Oh>
Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"

Comments on this draft must be with the ICRP no later than Friday 8
August. If you wish to offer your comments, please go to the entry form
here



 http://www.icrp.org/remissvar/remissvar.asp



http://www.icrp.org/draft_emergencies.asp





Fred Dawson  CRadP MSRP

Fwp_dawson at hotmail.com.





------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 08:46:49 -0500
From: "Jerry Lahti" <jerry1018 at wowway.com>
Subject: [ RadSafe ] FS: Classic reference books
To: "Radsafe post" <radsafe at radlab.nl>
Message-ID: <20080522133458.M20894 at wowway.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;       charset=iso-8859-1

For sale as a lot - a few more of my well used classic reference books.

Asking price $65 including shipping in the US by Priority Mail.

1. Meteorology and Atomic Energy - 1968 - USAEC, 445pp
2. Radiological Health Handbook, Rev ed 1970, US Dept of Health, Education and
Welfare, 458pp
3. DG Jacobs, Sources of Tritium and its behavior upon release to the
environment, AEC Critical Review Series, 1968, 90pp
4. GA Briggs, Plume Rise, AEC Critical Review Series, 1969, 81pp
--
Jerry Lahti
Naperville IL
630-334-6522


------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 11:34:28 -0400
From: Clayton J Bradt <cjb01 at health.state.ny.us>
Subject: [ RadSafe ] "Switzerland Destroyed Nuclear Smuggling Papers"
        + links
To: radsafe at radlab.nl
Message-ID: <mailman.512.1211487673.8156.radsafe at radlab.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8


>From Global Security Newswire 5-21-2008:





 Switzerland Destroyed Nuclear Smuggling Papers





 Switzerland destroyed documents in November that were related to the case
 of three Swiss engineers who allegedly help supply equipment to Libya???s
 nuclear-weapon program, Swissinfo reported yesterday (see GSN, May 26,
 2006).


 Friedrich Tinner was detained about four years ago with his two sons, Urs
 and Marco, on suspicion that they had aided the smuggling ring once run by
 former top Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan.


 One of the men remains in confinement as authorities investigate the case.


 There have been rumors that the United States asked Switzerland to destroy
 the documents to suppress evidence that the three men had worked with the
 CIA, according to Swissinfo.


 The shredding of the papers, confirmed by the head of a Swiss parliamentary
 control committee, could undermine the investigation of the case while
 eliminating evidence potentially useful for the defendants (Swissinfo, May
 20).



*
*
*
Swissinfo May 20, 2008 - 2:24 PM :
Papers on nuclear smuggling ring shredded
The government ordered the destruction of documents on an alleged
international nuclear smuggling network involving three Swiss engineers, it
has been confirmed.


The head of a parliamentary control committee said the material was
shredded last November.


The father and sons ??? Friedrich, Marco and Urs Tinner - are suspected of
helping to supply parts for Libya's nuclear weapons programme between 2001
and 2003 through a trafficking ring run by Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of
Pakistan's atom bomb.


Reports say the three worked as undercover agents for the United States
intelligence service.


There is widespread media speculation that Washington asked the Swiss
government to destroy any evidence suggesting cooperation between the
engineers and the CIA.


They were arrested nearly four years ago. One of them is still detained in
Switzerland pending the outcome of a criminal investigation.


Experts say the destruction of the documents could hamper the probe and
reduce the defence's case.


*
*
*

 U.S. Ignored Swiss Prosecutor???s Calls for Assistance in Nuclear Smuggling
 Investigation





 The United States has impeded Swiss efforts to prosecute three nuclear
 smuggling suspects linked to former top Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer
 Khan, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, May 31, 2005).


 Friedrich Tinner, a mechanical engineer and Swiss national, is suspected
 with his two sons, Urs and Marco, of providing the Khan network (see
 related GSN story, today) with uranium enrichment technology and
 equipment.??Authorities also believe Urs Tinner helped develop a Malaysian
 factory that produced thousands of gas centrifuge parts.


 Switzerland???s federal prosecutor on four separate occasions in the last
 year asked U.S. officials for documents and other evidence on the Khan
 network, a spokesman for the prosecutor said.


 ???Swiss authorities are asking for additional assistance from U.S.
 authorities, but we haven???t gotten an answer so far,??? said Mark Wiedmer,
 press secretary for the Swiss attorney general???s office.?????We are confident
 the American authorities will provide the information we need.???


 The Swiss officials contacted the Justice Department, which has an
 information-sharing agreement with Switzerland pertaining to international
 criminal cases.??They also contacted the State Department???s undersecretary
 for arms control and international security, according to officials.


 A top U.S. nuclear expert yesterday told a House International Relations
 subcommittee that the U.S. government had ???ignored multiple requests for
 cooperation??? on Khan network prosecutions.


 ???The prosecutors have not received a reply, or even a confirmation that the
 U.S. government received the requests,??? said David Albright, president of
 the Institute for Science and International Security.


 ???I find this lack of cooperation frankly embarrassing to the United States
 and to those of us who believe that the United States should take the lead
 in bringing members of the Khan network to justice for arming our enemies
 with nuclear weapons,??? he told the panel (Joby Warrick, Washington Post,
 May 26).



*
*
*
U.S. Silence Impeding Swiss in Nuclear Case
Expert Says Calls Have Been Ignored


By Joby Warrick
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, May 26, 2006; A16


Two years after the United States helped disrupt a notorious nuclear
smuggling ring, the Bush administration has hobbled a Swiss effort to
prosecute three of the alleged leaders by failing to share critical
information, an American nuclear expert and Swiss law enforcement officials
said yesterday.


Switzerland's federal prosecutor made at least four separate appeals for
U.S. help over the past year, asking for access to documents and other
evidence linked to the nuclear black market run by the Pakistani scientist
Abdul Qadeer Khan. In that time, the Swiss have received no assistance, or
even a reply, a spokesman for the prosecutor said.


"Swiss authorities are asking for additional assistance from U.S.
authorities, but we haven't gotten an answer so far," Mark Wiedmer, press
secretary for the Swiss attorney general's office, said in response to a
reporter's inquiry. "We are confident the American authorities will provide
the information we need."


The appeals were directed to the Justice Department, which has a bilateral
agreement with Switzerland on sharing information in international criminal
cases, and to the State Department's undersecretary for arms control and
international security, according to officials knowledgeable about the
requests. Calls to both agencies yesterday were not returned.


The problem was brought to light yesterday by a U.S. weapons expert who is
advising Swiss prosecutors on the technical aspects of the Khan case. In
testimony before a subcommittee of the House International Relations
Committee, David Albright said the U.S. government had "ignored multiple
requests for cooperation" in prosecuting members of the Khan network.


"The prosecutors have not received a reply, or even a confirmation that the
U.S. government received the requests," Albright, a nuclear expert and
president of the Institute for Science and International Security, told the
panel. He said the lack of assistance "needlessly complicates" an
investigation of great importance to both countries.


Swiss officials are seeking to bring charges against three businessmen who
allegedly played pivotal roles in Khan's smuggling scheme. Swiss
authorities have arrested Friedrich Tinner, a Swiss mechanical engineer,
and his two sons, Urs and Marco, who are suspected of supplying the network
with technology and equipment used in enriching uranium. Urs Tinner is also
suspected of helping Khan set up a secret Malaysian factory that made
thousands of components for gas centrifuges, machines used in uranium
enrichment. Formal charges have not yet been brought against them.


Some of the components were en route to Libya by ship in December 2003 when
they were intercepted by German and Italian officials in a raid that
brought the smuggling ring to light. The United States, which provided key
intelligence that led to the intercept, heralded the breakup of the Khan
network as a major blow against nuclear proliferation.


In July 2004, President Bush viewed some of the components supplied by the
Tinners during a visit to the Energy Department's Oak Ridge National
Laboratory in eastern Tennessee. Bush called the Khan network "one of the
most dangerous sources of proliferation in the world" and attributed the
successful breakup to the efforts of "allies, working together."


Albright, in his testimony to the subcommittee on international terrorism
and nonproliferation, said, "I find this lack of cooperation frankly
embarrassing to the United States and to those of us who believe that the
United States should take the lead in bringing members of the Khan network
to justice for arming our enemies with nuclear weapons."


*


*


*
Germany Arrests Man In Libyan Atomic Case
Suspect Is Alleged to Be Middleman In Worldwide Smuggling Network


By Craig Whitlock and Shannon Smiley
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, October 12, 2004; Page A17


BERLIN, Oct. 11 -- German prosecutors said Monday they had arrested an
engineer on suspicion that he helped Libya in its efforts to build a
nuclear weapons program, eight months after the man was named by
authorities in Malaysia as a key figure in a network that spread nuclear
secrets around the world.


The man was arrested Thursday in the central German state of Hesse,
according to the German federal prosecutor's office, which did not release
his full name. Officials close to the investigation identified him as Urs
Tinner, 39, a member of a Swiss engineering family that has drawn scrutiny
from European authorities and nonproliferation experts for more than two
decades.


In February, Malaysian officials identified Tinner as a middleman in a
network that supplied Libya with gas centrifuge parts that could be used
for the enrichment of uranium. That network, headed by Pakistan's top
atomic scientist, Abdul Qadeer Khan, allegedly sold nuclear secrets to
Libya, Iran and other customers and is the focus of a global investigation
by the International Atomic Energy Agency and authorities in more than a
dozen countries.


According to German and South African officials, who carried out recent
arrests of alleged members of the network, those involved attempted to
illegally deliver high-technology engineering equipment to Libya for its
then-budding nuclear weapons program, drawing on companies in Germany,
Malaysia, Spain, Switzerland, South Africa and the United Arab Emirates.
Libya has since dismantled its weapons program under a deal negotiated with
the United States and Britain.


German prosecutors said in a statement that they were preparing to charge
Tinner, a Swiss citizen, with conspiracy to commit treason. A spokeswoman
for the federal prosecutor's office declined to elaborate or give details.


Swiss export-control officials said Monday that they recently completed an
inquiry into the business activities of Tinner and his family, based on the
allegations made in February by Malaysian police. In a telephone interview,
Othmar Wyss, spokesman for the State Secretariat for Economic Affairs,
declined to discuss the findings but said the results were given in late
September to Swiss prosecutors.


"Let me say it this way," Wyss said. "If all this information . . . had
been false, we would not have passed the results of our preliminary inquiry
to the prosecutor."


A spokesman for Switzerland's general prosecutor confirmed Monday that the
agency had cooperated with German investigators in the nuclear black market
probe but declined to comment further.


In a brief interview in March at his home in the northeastern Swiss village
of Haag, Tinner said his family had not been involved in any wrongdoing. He
acknowledged working as a mechanic for a Malaysian firm, Scomi Precision
Engineering, but said he was unaware of what the company's products were
being used for.


The probe into the nuclear network began in October 2003, when a German
ship carrying containers bound for Libya was searched in the port of
Taranto, Italy. Inside the containers, investigators said they found
centrifuge parts manufactured by Scomi that they suspected were intended to
help Libya enrich uranium.


Tinner worked as a consultant for Scomi from April 2002 until October 2003
and had a reputation for being secretive, Malaysian officials said.


Upon leaving the company, he erased technical drawings from the firm's
computers and took other records, giving "the impression that [he] did not
wish to leave any trace of his presence there," according to a Malaysian
police report.


                    ?? 2004 The Washington Post Company


*****************************************
Why wouldn't the US want to cooperate in prosecuting these guys?  Valerie
Plame-Wilson was reportedly working on the AQ Khan network when she was
outed in July 2003.


Clayton J. Bradt
dutchbradt at hughes.net
IMPORTANT NOTICE:  This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential or sensitive information which is, or may be, legally privileged or otherwise protected by law from further disclosure.  It is intended only for the addressee.  If you received this in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, please do not distribute, copy or use it or any attachments.  Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.


------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 09:05:46 -0700
From: "Ben Fore" <BenjB4 at gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] uranium smoke is a teratogen
To: Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV, "Steven Dapra" <sjd at swcp.com>,
        radsafelist <radsafe at radlab.nl>
Message-ID:
        <a3c2bd6c0805220905h17e2c97bi4019d85b73de12e4 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Mike,

Thanks for your message:

> ... when faced with strong evidence that DU concentrations
> in this shipment was very, very low; too low to be a health
> risk in any credible exposure scenario, you could have
> responded, "You are right; there really isn't a problem....

But as Dan pointed out, the levels were so low as to not be
natural sand if true:
  http://lists.radlab.nl/pipermail/radsafe/2008-May/009993.html

> Instead, you said (to paraphrase), "OH YEAH!?!
> Well, what about the lead?  SO THERE!"

I was referring to the lead levels for contrast.  But I think you
knew that.  It's a lot easier to insinuate that someone is
shouting an unreasoned argument than to join those of us
who are trying to quantify the answers to what the U.S.
Armed Forces Radiobiology Institute has been calling
"numerous unanswered questions" for at least a decade.

> When was the last time you were wrong about some
> aspect of DU; in particular, when you originally thought
> that something supported the position that DU is a
> serious health problem, but it turned out that it didn't?

There turned out to be more birth defects from anthrax vaccine
than I had been believing (I want to say "lead to believe" but
it has been years since there has been any substantial news
on anthrax vaccines because of the lawsuit ... and I know
how you feel about L-E-A-D....)

Steven Dapra wrote:

> James, you can't even keep track of what you're fulminating about.

I'm sure the people who agree with you that uranium smoke is
not a proven teratogen agree with you on that point, too.  But
then again, if there is one paper that says uranium smoke
contains uranyl, and another that says uranyl is a teratogen,
why are you unable to connect the dots?

Is it because you prefer that people not know the quantities
involved?  How much of a teratogen, and how much exposure
there has been over time?

Why have you not bothered to read the Domingo papers?
You are willing to spend hours arguing with me, but not willing
to read the central papers in the field?  Does that indicate
the depth of your commitment to science?

James Salsman, writing as Ben Fore


------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 09:24:59 -0700
From: "Brennan, Mike  (DOH)" <Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV>
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] uranium smoke is a teratogen
To: "radsafelist" <radsafe at radlab.nl>
Message-ID:
        <46C89C7B1C707349B7EF750C6847622C11DA8076 at dohmxtum31.doh.wa.lcl>
Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"

>I was referring to the lead levels for contrast.

Contrast for what?  I included your entire statement on the subject, so
I certainly wasn't quoting you out of context.  To me, reading what you
said, it seemed clear that you wanted that shipment to be dangerous
because of the DU, and when that turned out not to be the case (and yes,
I know there was an error of some sort in the original article), rather
than letting it go, you changed to a different reason for it to be
"dangerous".  If that was not your intention, you communicated your
intention poorly.  I do not believe the error was in my understanding,
and I would submit that if we polled the subscribers of this board they
would overwhelmingly agree with my interpretation of what you wrote (and
only in part because most of them have lost patience with you for just
this kind of thing).

>"There turned out to be more birth defects from anthrax vaccine than I
had been believing..."

So, the error that comes to your mind is that you thought the American
Military was Evil for one unsubstantiated reason, but you decided it was
Evil for a different unsubstantiated reason?

I think we can safely put the discussion of credibility to bed.

-----Original Message-----
From: jsalsman at gmail.com [mailto:jsalsman at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ben
Fore
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 9:06 AM
To: Brennan, Mike (DOH); Steven Dapra; radsafelist
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] uranium smoke is a teratogen

Mike,

Thanks for your message:

> ... when faced with strong evidence that DU concentrations in this
> shipment was very, very low; too low to be a health risk in any
> credible exposure scenario, you could have responded, "You are right;
> there really isn't a problem....

But as Dan pointed out, the levels were so low as to not be natural sand
if true:
  http://lists.radlab.nl/pipermail/radsafe/2008-May/009993.html

> Instead, you said (to paraphrase), "OH YEAH!?!
> Well, what about the lead?  SO THERE!"

I was referring to the lead levels for contrast.  But I think you knew
that.  It's a lot easier to insinuate that someone is shouting an
unreasoned argument than to join those of us who are trying to quantify
the answers to what the U.S.
Armed Forces Radiobiology Institute has been calling "numerous
unanswered questions" for at least a decade.

> When was the last time you were wrong about some aspect of DU; in
> particular, when you originally thought that something supported the
> position that DU is a serious health problem, but it turned out that
> it didn't?

There turned out to be more birth defects from anthrax vaccine than I
had been believing (I want to say "lead to believe" but it has been
years since there has been any substantial news on anthrax vaccines
because of the lawsuit ... and I know how you feel about L-E-A-D....)

Steven Dapra wrote:

> James, you can't even keep track of what you're fulminating about.

I'm sure the people who agree with you that uranium smoke is not a
proven teratogen agree with you on that point, too.  But then again, if
there is one paper that says uranium smoke contains uranyl, and another
that says uranyl is a teratogen, why are you unable to connect the dots?

Is it because you prefer that people not know the quantities involved?
How much of a teratogen, and how much exposure there has been over time?

Why have you not bothered to read the Domingo papers?
You are willing to spend hours arguing with me, but not willing to read
the central papers in the field?  Does that indicate the depth of your
commitment to science?

James Salsman, writing as Ben Fore


------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 13:00:27 -0500
From: Doug Aitken <jdaitken at sugar-land.oilfield.slb.com>
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] uranium smoke is a teratogen
To: 'Ben Fore' <BenjB4 at gmail.com>, Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV,     'Steven
        Dapra' <sjd at swcp.com>, 'radsafelist' <radsafe at radlab.nl>
Message-ID: <00ab01c8bc35$c2839130$478ab390$@oilfield.slb.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Salsman/fore:
I'm getting a bit tired of these posts. But unfortunately, as they come in under Radsafe, I cannot add you to my "blocked address" list.....

This latest post has a typical  conspiracy theory implication....

1) " the levels (of U) were so low as to not be natural sand if true .."
2) toss in a red herring about Lead
3)  Raise the "specter" of "government cover-up"

So, the lab mis-reported the level of Uranium. Rather than accept this simple fact, you "imply" that there is something naughty going on and that the shipment of sand had been tampered with?

Seems to me that you have had you head in the sand for a bit too long.....

Regards
Doug

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe Ben Fore


> ... when faced with strong evidence that DU concentrations
> in this shipment was very, very low; too low to be a health
> risk in any credible exposure scenario, you could have
> responded, "You are right; there really isn't a problem....

But as Dan pointed out, the levels were so low as to not be
natural sand if true:
  http://lists.radlab.nl/pipermail/radsafe/2008-May/009993.html

> Instead, you said (to paraphrase), "OH YEAH!?!
> Well, what about the lead?  SO THERE!"

I was referring to the lead levels for contrast.  But I think you
knew that.  It's a lot easier to insinuate that someone is
shouting an unreasoned argument than to join those of us
who are trying to quantify the answers to what the U.S.
Armed Forces Radiobiology Institute has been calling
"numerous unanswered questions" for at least a decade....>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Doug Aitken     Cell phone: 713-562-8585
QHSE Advisor
D&M Operations Support
Schlumberger Technology Corporation
300 Schlumberger Drive
Sugar Land TX 77030

Home office: 713-797-0919  Home Fax: 713-797-1757
______________________________________________






------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 14:21:06 -0500
From: Dan W McCarn <hotgreenchile at gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] uranium smoke is a teratogen
To: "'radsafelist'" <radsafe at radlab.nl>
Cc: Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV, 'Ben Fore' <BenjB4 at gmail.com>
Message-ID: <041f01c8bc40$fd3d9720$f7b8c560$@com>
Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="UTF-8"

<< But as Dan pointed out, the levels were so low as to not be natural sand if true>>

Since these values were reported in a newspaper, I suggest that the newspaper folks are at fault and had no clue about ppt or ppm levels in geomedia.  The value is likely 10 ppm, about 1/10 the value found in the Chatanooga, Pierre and Mancos Shales and 2-5 times that found in normal concretes. Many granites are on the close order of 10 ppm, and some like Rossing in Namibia, are about 100 ppm.

My experience is that the media tends to garble results badly.  My survey of 6 newspapers over one year in Central Europe (1988-1989) confirmed a very high incidence of error in reporting on environmental issues, with the notable exception of the one Swiss newspaper.

This is why scientific lieterature is peer reviewed (but not always).

Dan ii

Dan W. McCarn, Geologist; 3118 Pebble Lake Drive; Sugar Land, TX 77479; USA;
mccarn at unileoben.ac.at           HotGreenChile at gmail.com           UConcentrate at gmail.com


-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On Behalf Of Ben Fore
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 11:06 AM
To: Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV; Steven Dapra; radsafelist
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] uranium smoke is a teratogen

Mike,

Thanks for your message:

> ... when faced with strong evidence that DU concentrations
> in this shipment was very, very low; too low to be a health
> risk in any credible exposure scenario, you could have
> responded, "You are right; there really isn't a problem....

But as Dan pointed out, the levels were so low as to not be
natural sand if true:
  http://lists.radlab.nl/pipermail/radsafe/2008-May/009993.html

> Instead, you said (to paraphrase), "OH YEAH!?!
> Well, what about the lead?  SO THERE!"

I was referring to the lead levels for contrast.  But I think you
knew that.  It's a lot easier to insinuate that someone is
shouting an unreasoned argument than to join those of us
who are trying to quantify the answers to what the U.S.
Armed Forces Radiobiology Institute has been calling
"numerous unanswered questions" for at least a decade.

> When was the last time you were wrong about some
> aspect of DU; in particular, when you originally thought
> that something supported the position that DU is a
> serious health problem, but it turned out that it didn't?

There turned out to be more birth defects from anthrax vaccine
than I had been believing (I want to say "lead to believe" but
it has been years since there has been any substantial news
on anthrax vaccines because of the lawsuit ... and I know
how you feel about L-E-A-D....)

Steven Dapra wrote:

> James, you can't even keep track of what you're fulminating about.

I'm sure the people who agree with you that uranium smoke is
not a proven teratogen agree with you on that point, too.  But
then again, if there is one paper that says uranium smoke
contains uranyl, and another that says uranyl is a teratogen,
why are you unable to connect the dots?

Is it because you prefer that people not know the quantities
involved?  How much of a teratogen, and how much exposure
there has been over time?

Why have you not bothered to read the Domingo papers?
You are willing to spend hours arguing with me, but not willing
to read the central papers in the field?  Does that indicate
the depth of your commitment to science?

James Salsman, writing as Ben Fore
_______________________________________________
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/



------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 13:16:28 -0700
From: "Brennan, Mike  (DOH)" <Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV>
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] uranium smoke is a teratogen
To: "radsafelist" <radsafe at radlab.nl>
Message-ID:
        <46C89C7B1C707349B7EF750C6847622C11DA8078 at dohmxtum31.doh.wa.lcl>
Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"

Hi, Dan.

Regardless of Ben/James' response, I have found your posts extremely
interesting and informative.  Natural rad in the ground is not my strong
suit, and I appreciate you sharing your expertise with us.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan W McCarn [mailto:hotgreenchile at gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 12:21 PM
To: 'radsafelist'
Cc: 'Ben Fore'; Brennan, Mike (DOH); 'Steven Dapra'
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] uranium smoke is a teratogen

<< But as Dan pointed out, the levels were so low as to not be natural
sand if true>>

Since these values were reported in a newspaper, I suggest that the
newspaper folks are at fault and had no clue about ppt or ppm levels in
geomedia.  The value is likely 10 ppm, about 1/10 the value found in the
Chatanooga, Pierre and Mancos Shales and 2-5 times that found in normal
concretes. Many granites are on the close order of 10 ppm, and some like
Rossing in Namibia, are about 100 ppm.

My experience is that the media tends to garble results badly.  My
survey of 6 newspapers over one year in Central Europe (1988-1989)
confirmed a very high incidence of error in reporting on environmental
issues, with the notable exception of the one Swiss newspaper.

This is why scientific lieterature is peer reviewed (but not always).

Dan ii

Dan W. McCarn, Geologist; 3118 Pebble Lake Drive; Sugar Land, TX 77479;
USA;
mccarn at unileoben.ac.at           HotGreenChile at gmail.com
UConcentrate at gmail.com


-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On
Behalf Of Ben Fore
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 11:06 AM
To: Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV; Steven Dapra; radsafelist
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] uranium smoke is a teratogen

Mike,

Thanks for your message:

> ... when faced with strong evidence that DU concentrations in this
> shipment was very, very low; too low to be a health risk in any
> credible exposure scenario, you could have responded, "You are right;
> there really isn't a problem....

But as Dan pointed out, the levels were so low as to not be natural sand
if true:
  http://lists.radlab.nl/pipermail/radsafe/2008-May/009993.html

> Instead, you said (to paraphrase), "OH YEAH!?!
> Well, what about the lead?  SO THERE!"

I was referring to the lead levels for contrast.  But I think you knew
that.  It's a lot easier to insinuate that someone is shouting an
unreasoned argument than to join those of us who are trying to quantify
the answers to what the U.S.
Armed Forces Radiobiology Institute has been calling "numerous
unanswered questions" for at least a decade.

> When was the last time you were wrong about some aspect of DU; in
> particular, when you originally thought that something supported the
> position that DU is a serious health problem, but it turned out that
> it didn't?

There turned out to be more birth defects from anthrax vaccine than I
had been believing (I want to say "lead to believe" but it has been
years since there has been any substantial news on anthrax vaccines
because of the lawsuit ... and I know how you feel about L-E-A-D....)

Steven Dapra wrote:

> James, you can't even keep track of what you're fulminating about.

I'm sure the people who agree with you that uranium smoke is not a
proven teratogen agree with you on that point, too.  But then again, if
there is one paper that says uranium smoke contains uranyl, and another
that says uranyl is a teratogen, why are you unable to connect the dots?

Is it because you prefer that people not know the quantities involved?
How much of a teratogen, and how much exposure there has been over time?

Why have you not bothered to read the Domingo papers?
You are willing to spend hours arguing with me, but not willing to read
the central papers in the field?  Does that indicate the depth of your
commitment to science?

James Salsman, writing as Ben Fore
_______________________________________________
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/




------------------------------

_______________________________________________
radsafe mailing list
radsafe at radlab.nl
http://lists.radlab.nl/mailman/listinfo/radsafe


End of radsafe Digest, Vol 147, Issue 4
***************************************

This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of
the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
information.  If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution
or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly
prohibited.

If you have received this message in error, please contact
the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the
original message (including attachments).



More information about the RadSafe mailing list