[ RadSafe ] ALARA and Toasters

[Jerry Cohen]

Mike,
    You make a very interesting point and provide some "food for thought".
    I have always been fond of my toaster, but have never considered 
carrying the relationship beyond breakfast ;-)

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Brennan, Mike (DOH)" <Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV>
To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) MailingList" 
<radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 11:32 AM
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] (not international) stop using 
linearno-threshold(LNT) model


> Hi, Helmut.
>
> First, I disagree with your statement that "Censorship is heavy on this
> forum."  I have read this forum for a number of years, and have seen
> people with wildly differing positions post here.  Some of them have
> been clearly technically wrong, as well as unpleasant in the way they
> addressed others, and still they were allowed to post.  I believe the
> moderators have been very light handed in removing people and/or posts,
> even when they felt it would be justified.  Having been a moderator I
> know how difficult this can be.
>
> Second, if LNT can be demonstrated not to be a valid model, then it
> makes sense to replace it with a more valid model.  To do anything else
> is not scientifically sound.  " LNT was adopted not for scientific
> reasons, but for political reasons." is not justification, it is an
> inditement against it.  "Once the barrier is broken, there will be no
> rationale left preventing inflationary raising of allowed contamination
> levels." is a slippery slope argument that fails for several reasons;
> (1) if higher contamination levels are not a health risk, then there is
> no reason to adopt them, (2) the described danger does not in fact
> necessarily follow (just as allowing gay people to marry does not
> naturally open the door for marriage between people and entities that
> cannot consent, such as children, sheep, or toasters), and (3) it is
> entirely possible that allowing higher contamination levels in some
> areas (such as waste disposal) will actually decrease overall risk to
> the public, by freeing up resources currently spent on unnecessarily
> conservative activities, and making them available for other, more
> productive activities (such as dismantling old dams that are no longer
> capable of withstanding earthquakes.
>
> Third, "When the nuclear industry can no longer follow LNT methods
> because they already poisoned half of planet EARTH, then there is only
> one logical step left: CLOSE ALL NUCLEAR PLANTS." Contains several
> fallacies. The "nuclear industry" can follow LNT methods; it simply may
> be a better use of resources to set standards based on some other risk
> model, particularly if LNT is demonstrated to not be valid.  The phrase
> "...they already poisoned half of planet EARTH,..." implies something
> that is not true, and is not possible in any meaningful way.  "... then
> there is only one logical step left: CLOSE ALL NUCLEAR PLANTS." is a
> conclusion that does not necessarily follow from the preceding
> statements, which are, in any case, not factual.
>
> Helmut, I welcome you to this forum.  I think we could have some
> interesting discussions, and have some fun.  We can learn things from
> each other, even if we do not come to a meeting of minds.  I would
> encourage you to improve your understanding of your own positions by
> formulating them in logical, consistent, evidence-based statements, as
> those will be most likely to get others to take you seriously.  I
> encourage you to not think people on this forum are stupid or ignorant
> because they do not accept your position out of hand, because there are
> some people here who are brilliant and knowledgeable to a level that
> leaves me in awe.  Please feel free to defend you positions, but if you
> expect to change anyone's mind, you need to show yours is also open.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Helmut Wabnig
> Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 10:35 AM
> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] (not international) stop using linear
> no-threshold(LNT) model
>
> On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:20:53 -0700, you wrote:
>
>>
>>>April 24, 2013
>>
>>The LNT model is devoid of merit. I explained the science that proves
>>this fact in my Health Physics Forum Article "Toward Improved Ionizing
>>Radiation Safety Standards, Health Physics 101: 84-93; 2011.
>>
>>If you want a copy send a request to ograabe at ucdavis.edu
>>
>>The EPA standards are ridiculously low due to their application of' the
>
>>faulty LNT hypothesis leading to the unnecessary expenditure of
>>billions of dollars moving virtually clean dirt and refuse to expensive
> waste disposal facilities.
>>
>>This petition does not suggest eliminating radiation safety standards
>>but rather switching to scientifically sound standards.
>>
>>Otto
>
> Censorship is heavy on this forum.
> Nevertheless I try to explain what will happen next:
> (once the LNT is toppled)
>
> The nuclear industry will be happy to raise the pollution levels to the
> maximum allowed extent, always bragging about the latest scientific
> discoveries. They will joyously pick up the argument how increased
> radiation levels benefit your health.
> Once the barrier is broken, there will be no rationale left preventing
> inflationary raising of allowed contamination levels.
>
> LNT was adopted not for scientific reasons, but for political reasons.
> When the nuclear industry can no longer follow LNT methods because they
> already poisoned half of planet EARTH, then there is only one logical
> step left:
> CLOSE ALL NUCLEAR PLANTS.
>
> w.
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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