Re: Check out U.S. Acknowledges Radiation Caused Cancers in Workers

[Jim Muckerheide <jmuckerheide@delphi.com>]

Hi Mort, Group,

Mrtgoldman@aol.com wrote:
> 
> Without more information on the "draft report" cited here, I find this
> difficult to swallow whole..  it smells more of politics than science..
> 
> Mort Goldman
> Retired Troublemaker
> 
>  <A HREF="http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/national/nuclear-cancer.html";>
> Click here: U.S. Acknowledges Radiation Caused Cancers in Workers</A>

Group,

Who knows anything about this "study"? Funny thing: Our reviews of the nuclear
worker studies didn't find this result!!

There's no author or other responsibility identified that did this "most
comprehensive review," and no identification of "researchers," just
politicians, starting with Clinton and Richardson. Were the "researchers" just
Richardson's staff?, lawyers?, just doing what they are told? No culpability
for manipulating data for those people. Or nat'l lab people given a few $$ to
do "research." Any integrity in that? 

If they found previous scientific failures, they aren't indicated here. Does
the report identify people to be investigated?

Is this real?  Or junk science, or just more junk leaders?

The writer buys the whole thing without a qualm that this is refuting
everything done for 50 years that show no adverse health effects to nuclear
workers. (With a few small studies that are contrary, and IARC, that have been
shown to be the result of misrepresenting the data.

There are no commenters except "worker compensation interests." The writer
couldn't find one of those (criminals) responsible for previous studies and
who defended the AEC/DOE in lawsuits from workers to comment?

Junk media?

The gov't willingness to screw the public to pay local/political interests is
increasingly unbounded. Are the labs speaking? will speak? or being paid-off
to keep silent? Will we ever hear anything from them? Like Brookhaven: paid
off to bleed the public for $$ to cleanup nothing, sacrificing all science,
and scientific integrity.

What about ANS? does this relate to ANS leaders misrepresenting the data? 

And NEI? Will they speak up? ever? They should need to respond. This DOE
"position" opens the door for all nuclear workers (~30% will get cancer, and
~20% will die from it - less than the general population - at older ages) to
credibly sue for compensation!! Or like the UK, the industry will agree with
the unions, etc., to "save money" by just compensating without lawsuits, but
locking another cost that makes nuclear 'uneconomic'.

And we blame the anti's for trashing nuclear?  They don't hold a candle!
They're just DOE's coat holders - on the payroll, funded at cleanup sites to
maintain public 'concern.'

Thanks.

Regards, Jim
============
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html