[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The FEAR is Our own worst enemy. (Re)
You just jogged a thought. Could it be that safety professionals are too much
caught up in their own paradigm? We spend our days worrying about things that
might happen and doing something to prevent what might happen from happening.
That's our business, radiation protection. If we have nothing to protect
against because nothing harmful might happen, we are out of work. Being stuck
in this paradigm or way of thinking, we are not able to consider a different
situation, namely: there may be no harm from low doses. If there is no harm,
our job is done. But we can't allow that thought because is is contrary to our
paradigm. I challenge all of you to consider this idea and to see if it isn't
part of our problem. I know it will be difficult to think that our job is
done. Obviously for situations where real harm can occur, we still need to look
for things that might happen and take appropriate precautions. But, let's quit
looking for the "might occurs" where our current experience shows there is no
demonstrated harm.
And lets tell our congresspersons to quit thinking as we do when there are no
data demonstrating harm.
Al Tschaeche antatnsu@pacbell.net
"D. Kosloff" wrote:
> 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
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