[ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima

[Busby, Chris]

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of franz.schoenhofer at chello.at
Sent: Thu 23/06/2011 11:42
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List; The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) MailingList
Cc: Busby, Chris
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima
 
Chris,

Your method to confuse RADSAFE with repeating again and again dozens of mails is well known, but it is annoying - which is obviously what it should be according to your tactics. 

You base your comment on some "anticipated" deaths, which have not yet occurred and will most probably never occur, in analogue to Chernobyl. This is not science and not worth "one of the best epidemiologists and the most knowledgable person on radioecology, radioactivity, and nuclear accidents in the world". You present your own personal speculations as facts. This is highly unethical, respecially when it is associated with money to be earned. 

Best regards,

Franz. 

 According to good practice I removed all your kB of repeated mails to make mine reasable.    



---- "Busby schrieb:
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Dustin G. Miller
> Sent: Wed 22/06/2011 19:39
> To: 'The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing	List'
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima
>  
> Why would you attribute all increased deaths/cancer incidence/infant
> mortality to the exposures?  There is more happening to the people in
> Fukushima than exposure to radioactive materials.  With the tsunami, I would
> assume the following could increase the death/cancer incidence/infant
> mortality in the area

_______________________________________________
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


Dear Franz,
I am afraid that is how science works.
You compare like with like.
So I compare Chernobyl with Fukushima.
Chronsic internal fission product exposures.
So do many others.
What ICRP does (and the radsafers or health physics people do) is compare Fukushima with the huge acute gamma external exposure at Hiroshima.
That is not science. It is nonsense.
Cheers
Chris