[ RadSafe ] Agreeing with Franz on "dogma"

Thu Aug 20 12:14:44 CDT 2015

Mike, I agree. We wear a lot of hats, depending on where we work and accountabilities. My position required a varied look when I worked for the State of Florida, 21 years at Florida Power and Light Company and 18 years at Mirion. Never a dull moment!

Regards,

Sandy
Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 20, 2015, at 10:08 AM, Brennan, Mike (DOH) <Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV> wrote:
> 
> While as a Heath Physicist I am a mere stripling of 25 years, I view my role a little differently, perhaps because I deal more with the general public (as the person running our radon program, and working in our environmental section) than I do radiation workers.  I spend a fair amount of time trying to help people understand relative risk, so they can make informed choices.  As an example, in the Fukushima aftermath I spent a fair amount of time convincing people that fleeing Seattle for places like Denver or Spokane was not decreasing their risk, or that their constant state of agitation was probably a greater health risk than any radiation exposure they would ever receive.  
> 
> As others have said, I don't have negative feelings towards the word "dogma", and I believe that it actually describes LNT fairly well, at least in the regulatory and activist communities.  I don't, however, believe that simply because something is dogma that is should be exempt from questioning, and I think questioning LNT is very worthwhile.  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Sander Perle
> Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2015 9:50 AM
> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Agreeing with Franz on "dogma"
> 
> As a Health Physicist for 44 years, our role is to ensure a safe radiation environment work place, not just at high dose/dose rates, but at any dose/dose rate. This includes ensuring that the facility, NPP, University or Medical Institution meets all applicable regulations, license conditions, public dose, etc. 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Sandy
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Aug 20, 2015, at 9:36 AM, Joseph Preisig <jrpnj01 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Radsafe,
>> 
>>    Nuclear reactors, when operated properly and when they are not 
>> being hit by a tsunami or a large/great earthquake, are inherently 
>> safe.  They are designed to be safe.  They operate well and provide 
>> useful amounts of power.  There is risk in walking down the street.
>> Is it safe???  (question is asked in the movie the Marathon Man)....
>>    Why are we always worried about LNT and the low dose end of the 
>> curve???  Isn't the health physicist's job at higher doses/dose 
>> rates????
>>    Joe Preisig
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On 8/20/15, Bill Prestwich <prestwic at mcmaster.ca> wrote:
>>> I think it is possible to expose the falseness in the anti-nuclear 
>>> movement within the LNT approach as used by regulators.  The argument 
>>> used by this movement is that science has shown no level of radiation 
>>> is safe. In the first place there is no scientific definition of 
>>> safe. What the opponents of nuclear power are claiming is that safe 
>>> is defined as a process that has zero probability of harm. With that 
>>> definition almost nothing is safe. The reply to these people is that 
>>> they are claiming that a probability of one in a trillion that an 
>>> action could cause some harm means that action should be abolished. 
>>> Instead I think one could argue that the LNT is over restricting and 
>>> hence overly careful in protecting the public.
>>> 
>>> Bill Prestwich
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu 
>>> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of KARAM, PHILIP
>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 2:41 PM
>>> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing 
>>> List
>>> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Agreeing with Franz on "dogma"
>>> 
>>> I don't think that the word "dogma" is at all derisive in and of 
>>> itself. In biochem we learned the "central dogma of molecular 
>>> biology" (which you can find in any number of textbooks in precisely 
>>> that phrasing), which was DNA-RNA-protein. In Sunday school 
>>> (Catholic) we learned a number of dogmas of the Catholic Church. Used properly, the word is descriptive, not loaded.
>>> 
>>> In the case of LNT, the use of the word dogma is certainly 
>>> appropriate in a number of cases.
>>> 
>>> -As Franz pointed out, it is NOT appropriate for the scientific 
>>> debate, which continues to be lively.
>>> -In the regulatory realm (and in the area of ALARA), LNT certainly 
>>> has become dogma in the sense that it is the central belief behind 
>>> the way that regulations are written and ALARA is practiced - and if 
>>> LNT were to be shown to be false then we might well have to re-think 
>>> the way that we practice ALARA as well as the way we regulate.
>>> -And among the anti-nuclear and anti-radiation activists LNT is most 
>>> certainly dogma in that it is virtually the only argument they use to 
>>> demand that all reactors be shut down and all use of radiation that 
>>> can expose the public be banned - if LNT is shown to be false then 
>>> their central argument crumbles to the ground.
>>> 
>>> The word itself is neither positive nor negative - it is simply 
>>> descriptive.
>>> But, like the word "evolution," it has come to mean more to some than 
>>> ought to be the case.
>>> 
>>> Andy
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
>>> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Peter Crane
>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 2:02 PM
>>> To: RADSAFE
>>> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Agreeing with Franz on "dogma"
>>> 
>>> It's a pleasure to be able to agree with Franz for once. This use of 
>>> loaded words such as "dogma" and "cult" to denigrate the LNT (and, on 
>>> the other side, the hormesis theory) adds nothing to the debate. The 
>>> propagandistic purpose is too obvious. Maybe that's OK if you are 
>>> just preaching to the choir, since you are not out to change any 
>>> minds, but trying to convert opponents by calling them cultists following a dogma? It doesn't work.
>>> 
>>> I'd love to know more about infighting in the Austrian bureaucracy, Franz.
>>> I
>>> thought the watchword there was Schlamperei, of taking things easy 
>>> and not too seriously, but I suppose I'm forgetting my Kafka, plus 
>>> the golden rule of organizations -- governmental, academic, etc. -- 
>>> that the smaller the stakes, the more vicious the internal battles 
>>> can be. By the way, if you know Bad Ischl, Villa Rothstein, my 
>>> great-grand-uncle's summer home, was where my grandmother played as a 
>>> child, back around 1901-1903. Das gibt's nur einmal, das kommt nicht wieder....
>>> 
>>> -- Peter Crane, Seattle
>>> NRC Counsel for Special Projects (retired) 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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