[ RadSafe ] A judges' criticism of John W Gofman ? Arthur RTamplin?

[KARAM, PHILIP]

Using "collective dose" we can also show that throwing a 1-gram rock at
everybody in Cleveland should cause a few deaths from crushing - since
the aggregate weight will be close to a ton and we know that you can
crush several people with a ton of rocks.

In reality, exposing each of a million people (or a billion) to a
trivial dose of radiation should have no more impact than exposing each
of a million people (or a billion) to a trivial dose of rock.

Andy

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Steven Dapra
Sent: Sunday, May 05, 2013 8:37 PM
To: tinyyoli; The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics)
Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] A judges' criticism of John W Gofman ? Arthur
RTamplin?

May 5

         Of course, Gofman's and Tamplin's deaths are mathematically 
derived deaths.  They can't show us death certificates or autopsies 
any more than they can show us corpses.  I wonder how they 
rationalized deaths from smoking cigarettes.  We can live without 
cigs too.  (No pun intended.)

Steven Dapra


At 04:58 PM 5/5/2013, you wrote:


>Steve,
>     I used the same argument. The response was that we can't do 
> anything about
>natural radiation, but we can live without nuclear power plants. In 
>either case,
>we are talking about a small fraction of the overall death rate.
>Jerry
>
>
>________________________________
>From: Steven Dapra <sjd at swcp.com>
>To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing
List
><radsafe at agni.phys.iit.edu>
>Sent: Sun, May 5, 2013 2:10:17 PM
>Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] A judges' criticism of John W Gofman ? 
>Arthur RTamplin?
>
>May 5
>
>         Background radiation exposes that ~300 million to
approximately 2.5
>times 170 mrem/a.  Show us the corpses, (Messrs. Gofman and Tamplin).
>
>Steven Dapra
>
>
>At 02:38 PM 5/5/2013, you wrote:
> > Brent,
> >    I agree. It is certainly possible for  good scientists to have
bad
>opinions.
> > Several years ago, I worked with Gofman and Tamplin at LLNL. 
> Although I did
>not
> > agree with their "logic", I could understand how their application
of ICRP
> > guidance might lead to several thousands " additional deaths" in 
> this country.
> > Simply stated, they "reasoned" that if the entire population of 
> the USA (~ 300
> > million) were exposed to a  maximum allowable dose of 170 mrem/a,
roughly
> >16,000
> > additional deaths would occur. Of course, the news media had a field
day
> > publicizing this "revelation". Although I could not agree with 
> the reasoning,
> > their math seemed  OK. I hesitate to suggest it, but perhaps the 
> "logic" used
> >in
> > development of the ICRP guidance should be open to some question.
> > Jerry Cohen
>
>[edit]


_______________________________________________
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