[ RadSafe ] Fwd: Forbes Article RadSafe

[Jeff Terry]

Hi All, 

Comment on the question below from Jim Conca. 

Jeff

Begin forwarded message:

> 
> 
> It was supposed to be ratified by the General Assembly this month, but hasn't yet.  I will post the link when it does. UNSCEAR staff such as Weiss have presented parts of it and that is where the information is coming from.  Attached are two source documents, which we were provided by a contact closely connected to the matter. I don't know how to attach them to a blog.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jan 16, 2013, at 1:05 PM, Jeff Terry wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Someone posted to the RadSafe mailing list a question about your Forbes article on LNT and Unscear.
> 
> Would you be willing to comment on it?
> 
> Jeff
> 
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/mailman/listinfo/radsafe/
> 
> I hate to spoil the fun, but my initial enthusiasm for the Conca/Forbes
> article
> (http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2013/01/11/like-weve-been-saying
> -radiation-is-not-a-big-deal/ ) on the supposed divorce from the LNT by
> Unscear is cooling down. In the first phrase there is mention of a 'very
> big report'. Now English is not my native language, so 'big' may also
> mean 'important', but the only thing I have found so far is a piece of
> 13 pages
> (http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/V12/553/85/PDF/V1255385.pdf?
> OpenElement ) and nothing there comes close to what Conca claims 'It
> concluded what we in nuclear science have been saying for decades -
> radiation doses less than about 10 rem (0.1 Sv) are no big deal.'
> Another quote  'UNSCEAR "does not recommend multiplying low doses by
> large numbers of individuals to estimate numbers of radiation-induced
> health effects within a population exposed to incremental doses at
> levels equivalent to or below natural background levels" is indeed
> there, but I find  this denouncement of the collective dose less
> impressive than what he originally suggests.
> The author himself does not link to the original report , strangely, but
> to a confusing piece  on Fukushima and the possible threshold of 100
> mSv. So where is this report where Unscear says goodbye to the LNT?
> 
> The information contained in this e-mail message, together with any attachments thereto, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the addressee[s] named above. The message and the attachments are or may be an attorney-client or other privileged or protected communication. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or authorized to receive it for the intended recipient, you have received this message in error. You are not to review, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message, any attachments thereto, or their contents. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify us by return e-mail message, and delete the original message. Thank you for your cooperation.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Fourth Committee Approval.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 2099657 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://health.phys.iit.edu/pipermail/radsafe/attachments/20130116/0f96f70b/attachment-0002.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: A-C.4-67-L.8.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 39223 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://health.phys.iit.edu/pipermail/radsafe/attachments/20130116/0f96f70b/attachment-0003.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------