[ RadSafe ] LNT discussion and Mr. Connell

al at solidsurfacealliance.org al at solidsurfacealliance.org
Tue May 5 19:45:54 CDT 2009

Thanks Mike, that is the problem with arguments like Mr. Connell uses, a bit of truth used in misleading ways.
I think your description of LNT is right, there will be different thresholds for everyone and near impossible to sort out. I personally can't see LNT working down at near zero levels, so I adopted 4 to 5 times background radiation level as my level of "safety", with the caveat of mentioning that Oklahoma has low background radiation (3 to 6 uR/hr). That said, if I sell someone a granite countertop that is at 15 uR/hr, I mention that some believe there is a tiny risk so that a 5 uR/hr top would be a better choice.
Mr. Cohen,
I'm working my way through that paper you sent, thank you for sending it.   I do have one question, if BEIR VII is correct, how can both positions be correct?  As an outsider to the radiation safety community, it is difficult to think of  both positions as accurate.  Until all this is sorted out, isn't ALARA still the best way to go?

More information about the RadSafe mailing list