[ RadSafe ] Is there a threshold for radiation effects?
od at tlmq.com
Thu Oct 20 15:15:05 CDT 2011
I quite agree with you. My qualitative impression from many years of
hospital work is that indeed the LNT assumption is seriously flawed.
However, it seems to me that it is not my (our?) obligation to prove that no
adverse effects exist at low dose-low rate exposures. It should be the
obligation of the LNT's advocates to prove the opposite.
THEAGENEION Anticancer Hospital
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Cohen" <jjc105 at yahoo.com>
To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List"
<radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 11:05 PM
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Is there a threshold for radiation effects?
> Dr. Edward Calabrese has received much criticism recently for suggesting
> Muller may have willfully withheld information indicating the existence
> threshold for radiation effects. Muller's research had a strong influence
> on the
> early BEIR committee recommendations for the assumption of LNT which
> the basis for many radiation exposure regulations, primarily ALARA.
> Since Muller is deceased, we may never know what his motivations were, but
> overwhelming evidence currently available indicates that LNT is a bogus
> Adherence to LNT has caused the needless squandering of billions dollars
> protect against a nonexistsent risk. There has been much discussion on
> on this issue. I was wondering whether the recent "revelations" have
> anybody's opinion on the subject.
> Jerry Cohen
> 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:
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
More information about the RadSafe