Re: The FEAR is Our own worst enemy. (Re)

["D. Kosloff" <dkosloff@ncweb.com>]

I am for you, sir.  But to many it depends on whose ox is being gored.

A couple of weeks ago I watched a Congressional hearing on OSHA's letter
that said employers should inspect telecommuters' homes for OSHA violations.
A democrat congressman walked in and said that he was concerned that some of
the Congressmen were upset about OSHA's actions, since no one had been
killed by the OSHA actions.  He went on to say that (I am not making this
up) everyone should consider that a mother who is not given enough money by
her employer might have her child strangle to death on her computer cords or
she might die after she cuts herself trying to take her computer apart to
fix it.

Don Kosloff  mailto:dkosloff@ncweb.com
2910 Main St, Perry OH

----- Original Message -----
From: Al Tschaeche <antatnsu@pacbell.net>
To: Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2000 6:58 PM
Subject: Re: The FEAR is Our own worst enemy. (Re)


> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> --------------A2B2B416B778ECC23E5FE2B3
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> Finally, someone else says what I have been saying for years.  If you
don't know
> something, say you don't and resist all requests to extrapolate,
hypothesize,
> guess, lie, cheat, steal or anything else.  Even if Congress asks.  Even
if the
> President of the United States asks.  Even if your mother asks.  Even if I
ask.
> We should stop regulating at the point where observable harm to humans
occurs.
> Anything else is immoral, unethical and wrong.  Besides being very
expensive.
> When and if, we find harm at those levels, then we can take appropriate
action.
> Only the nuclear industry plays this idiotic game.  Why don't other
industries?
> Because they know better.  Humans do learn by experience.  And it only by
> experience that they should learn.  We have learned that our experience
with the
> current radiation protection philosophy is wrong, harmful, and expensive.
We need
> to fix it!  Any more of you out there?  Al Tschaeche antatnsu@pacbell.net
>
> Kerembaev@cs.com wrote:
>
> > In my opinion,
> > IAEA, ICRP, NCRP and BEIR VI, fall under the temptation to speculate
about
> > the "future" health effects which have NO proof. Very subjective
> > recommendations on very serious object.
> > It is unacceptable practice, for the "serious" organization to speculate
> > about one direction and forgetting about a possibility of the other.
They do
> > that on regular basis by giving recommendations to the regulatory body.
They
> > KNOW that regulatory bodies WILL implement their speculative recommends
in
> > the present days regulations.
> > If they cannot distinguish scientific hypothesis from the proven theory.
> > I would recommend to THEM to tell the truth and say that they do NOT
know yet.
> > If we do not know, we do not know. Nothing terrible about admitting it.
> > Today, We need to use those knowledges what we know, NOW.
> > If tomorrow we will learn more we will use it.
> > I like to speculate about the future my self, but I am not in the
position to
> > force my speculations on the entire world community. They are. This is
the
> > only difference.
> >
> > In Chernobyl, I have seen more people who were terrified with the fear
of
> > radiation than, you can imagine. People USUALLY do not admit it, they
try to
> > coup with it in MANY different ways. I have seen only more stress
related
> > harm than real harms from the low levels of radiation.  People were
DYING
> > !!!! as the result of those fears. Acute radiation fear syndrome!!??
> > I strongly believe, Radiation Fears resulted in more harm that those low
> > level doses possible health effects.
> > Everybody can relate to the stress of unknown.
> > These very confusing "scientific" recommends just are adding the
constant
> > fuel to those very normal fears.
> > We/you have to spend these money to eliminate the REAL Harm from the
High
> > Radiation Levels but not to chase the ghost.
> >
> > Emil
> > kerembaev@cs.com
> >
> > << Congress be insisting that the agencies pass regulations that do not
> > result in real
> >  harm from false fears?  Perhaps someone should sue the agencies for not
> > doing their
> >  job in this respect?  How about including IAEA, ICRP, NCRP and BEIR VI?
> > What do
> >  y'all think?
> >   >>
> > ************************************************************************
> > The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> > information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
>
> --------------A2B2B416B778ECC23E5FE2B3
> Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
>  name="antatnsu.vcf"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Content-Description: Card for Al Tschaeche
> Content-Disposition: attachment;
>  filename="antatnsu.vcf"
>
> begin:vcard
> n:Tschaeche;Al
> x-mozilla-html:FALSE
> org:Nuclear Standards Unlimited
> version:2.1
> email;internet:antatnsu@postoffice.pacbell.net
> title:CEO
> x-mozilla-cpt:;0
> fn:Al Tschaeche
> end:vcard
>
> --------------A2B2B416B778ECC23E5FE2B3--
>
> ************************************************************************
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
>

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