[ RadSafe ] " Planned study on cancer risk faces challenges, science panel told "

[Perle, Sandy]

Blaine,

While much of what you say is true, the public does not and will not accept that premise. There was just a recent 60 Minutes segment on the issues with Southern Company's plans for adding reactors at Vogtle site. The cancer incidence rate is higher in this area. More likely, the reason is they have a toxic waste dump in the area, but the reactors are there as well. The NRC doesn't have a lack of common sense. They have to deal with the public and more importantly Congress, who questions all of this and hold the purse strings. The public influences Congress. It is a fact and there isn't anything that will change this.

Regards,

Sandy

-----------------------------------
Sander C. Perle
President
Mirion Technologies
Dosimetry Services Division
2652 McGaw Avenue
Irvine, CA 92614

+1 (949) 296-2306 (Office)
+1 (949) 296-1130 (Fax)

Mirion Technologies: http://www.mirion.com/


-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Blaine Howard
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 2:39 PM
To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
Subject: [ RadSafe ] " Planned study on cancer risk faces challenges, science panel told "

Dear RadSafers,
  I find it hard to understand why people look for radiation effects among those residing in the vicinity of a nuclear reactor when the obvious place to look is among those working in those reactors and other nuclear facilities.  The amount of radiation exposure to workers at the reactor is probably hundreds of times what residents in the vicinity of the reactor could have received.
  Nuclear workers world wide average about 21 per cent lower cancer mortality than the general public.  They also have 22 per cent lower all cause mortality.  This information comes from a table found in “Cancer Mortality Among French Atomic Energy Commission Workers” published in The American Journal of Industrial Medicine in 2004.
  Of course those defending the LNT claim this is just a very strong “Healthy Worker Effect”.  Isn't it marvelous how those employers were able to screen out applicants who would later die from cancer?  Anyway, the Nuclear Shipyard Worker Study proved that the Healthy Worker Effect was not responsible for the lower cancer death rate.
  My point is that there is much data about health effects of radiation which eliminates any negative effects of much higher radiation doses than those received by residents in the vicinity of a nuclear reactor.  Why should we spend millions of dollars to try to dig out some effects of trivial doses?  It seems that the NRC is lacking in common sense.

Blaine N. Howard
_______________________________________________
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://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu

PROPRIETARY INFORMATION NOTICE:   This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it are intended solely for use by the addressee and may contain proprietary information of Mirion Technologies and/or its affiliates.  If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to the message, delete the original message and all attachments from your computer, and destroy any copies you may have made.  Thank you.