[ RadSafe ] Psychological Impacts of Chernobyl
sjd at swcp.com
Fri Apr 29 07:30:38 CDT 2011
You rather strongly implied that Busby
and his fellow travelers have rushed in for the
purpose of "educating the world on the benefits
and true risks related to the peaceful use of
radioactive materials." They are not doing any such thing.
Now you say it's a "useful exercise" to
have his claims debunked. True, but that was not your original argument.
At 06:37 PM 4/28/2011, you wrote:
>I believe it is a useful exercise to have Mr. Busby's claims debunked by
>experts in the field. If not us, then who? I'm afraid that if we fail to
>respond, the uninformed might believe what he has to say. If nothing else is
>accomplished, most of us now know what his views are and the arguments
>From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
>[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Steven Dapra
>Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 5:11 PM
>To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
>Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Psychological Impacts of Chernobyl
> Chris Busby talks nonsense and is reluctant to substantiate any of
>his claims. He is a chemist, not a health physicist. He considers himself
>to be more of an authority on radioactivity than is the ICRP. He finally
>gave a few citations, some of them to Nature. Then, in another e-mail he
>called Nature a "rag."
> He complained loud and long that no one would address his claims
>about infant leukemias in the aftermath of Chernobyl. When I posted a
>message here directly addressing his claims about said leukemias he dropped
>out of sight. Does that sound like a "debate", much less an "honest
> In my estimation, calling Nature a "rag," or claiming the Fukushima
>accident will lead to hundreds of thousands of additional cancers, does not
>exactly constitute "divergent points of view."
> The "fact of the matter is" that most of the world does not care
>about the benefits or risks of the peaceful use of radioactive materials.
>One can't even lead this horse to water, let alone make him drink.
> Busby and his fellow travelers are not filling any void of
>inadequate education. What they are doing is spewing more hogwash into an
>already vast ocean of hogwash.
> And, yes, next time I'll really let you know what I think.
>At 01:00 PM 4/28/2011, you wrote:
> >You ask why Chris Busby still gets space on radsafe. Radsafe would be
> >much less interesting without the debate that comes from divergent
> >points of view. The fact of the matter is, our industry has not done a
> >good enough job of educating the world on the benefits and true risks
> >related to the peaceful use of radioactive materials. People like Mr.
> >Busby have rushed in to fill that void. We all win with honest debate.
> >Rich Gallego
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
> >[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Franz
> >Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 11:39 AM
> >To: 'The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics)
> >MailingList'; radsafe at agni.phys.iit.edu
> >Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Psychological Impacts of Chernobyl
> >Leo and RADSAFErs,
> >I do not have access to the literature you gave, but I heavily doubt
> >your statement, that "the number of excess induced abortions in Europe
> >due to this fear has been estimated in the tens of thousands, and even
> >Some people, one of the most noisy is Chris Busby, have claimed very
> >high numbers of abortions.
More information about the RadSafe