[ RadSafe ] Fwd: Communicating with the public and the press

Chris Alston achris1999 at gmail.com
Mon Aug 19 15:58:06 CDT 2013

Prof. Otto

For the same reasons, I personally prefer the phrase "residual
activity" to the term "contamination".  Out of curiosity, do you know
what Ray Johnson recommends for terminology, in this context?


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Otto G. Raabe <ograabe at ucdavis.edu>
Date: Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 3:32 PM
Subject: [ RadSafe ] Communicating with the public and the press
To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing
List" <radsafe at agni.phys.iit.edu>


August  18, 2008

When speaking with the public, Congress, or the press, there are two
four-letter words that we should carefully avoid: "RISK" and "DOSE".

To the public these words mean and imply very different negative ideas
than what we intend. We can substitute "CHANCE" and "LEVELS" to
replace them.

This is the "risk communication" message we need to deliver:

"Low levels of ionizing radiation are not hazardous, not dangerous,
and not a threat! "


Prof. Otto G. Raabe, Ph.D., CHP
Center for Health & the Environment
University of California
One Shields Avenue
Davis, CA 95616
E-Mail: ograabe at ucdavis.edu
Phone: (530) 752-7754   FAX: (530) 758-6140
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 mailing list