[ RadSafe ] Cell phones, nuclear power, global warming,etc

[Wade Allison]

Doug
"How would I know who to believe?" Very simple. Look at the evidence yourself and stop trying to weigh the opinions of experts! I am nothing to do with any safety lobby or nuclear industry but I did that. You might like another book to read but please look at the data and not the opinions. http://www.radiationandreason.com 
Best
Wade
 
Professor Wade Allison, MA DPhil  w.allison1 at physics.ox.ac.uk 
Denys Wilkinson Bldg., Keble Rd, Oxford, UK
Fellow & Tutor in Physics, Keble College, Oxford, UK 
"Radiation and Reason" http://www.radiationandreason.com <http://www.radiationandreason.com/>  (Oct09) 0-9562756-1-3
"Fundamental Physics for Probing and Imaging" http://www.oup.co.uk/isbn/0-19-920389-X <https://winfe.physics.ox.ac.uk/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.oup.co.uk/isbn/0-19-920389-X>  (Oct06)

________________________________

From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl on behalf of Douglas Minnema
Sent: Wed 06/01/2010 18:02
To: 'radsafe at radlab.nl'; Mark L Miller
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Cell phones, nuclear power, global warming,etc



Mark,

I have not read this book yet, will add it to my list.  In return, I'll add one to your list:  "Doubt is Their Product: How industry's Assault on Science Threatens Your Health," by David Michaels, Oxford University Press.

For those DOE'ers out there, David Michaels used to be the Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety, and Health at DOE during the later years of the Clinton Administration.  He is most recognized for having pushed through the DOE workers' occupational illness compensation program.

Fascinating book, and apparently very well documented.  It describes how regulated industries, and industries in fear of future regulation, have created methodologies for defending their products against those who would regulate them.  Many of those methods would, on the surface, appear to be logical approaches to evaluating health risks based on sound scientific principles.  But the question becomes one of "what are the motives behind the scientific results" rather than "what are the merits of the scientific results."

Unfortunately, the book puts me in a quandary - now that Michaels has detailed all of the 'tricks' used to slant scientific results in various directions, I can see elements of these 'tricks' being used on both sides of the street, so to speak.  It makes me pause and ask myself, "how would I know who to believe."

Doug Minnema, PhD, CHP
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

>>> "Miller, Mark L" <mmiller at sandia.gov> 1/6/2010 12:24 PM >>>
I recommend "Denialism:  How Irrational Thinking Hinders Scientific Progress, Harms the Planet and Threatens Our Lives" by Michael Specter, The Penguin Press. 

_______________________________________________
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/
_______________________________________________
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/