Re: risk abatement options (response to Tschaeche)

[Ernesto_Faillace@notes.ymp.gov]

Barbara Hamrick writes:

>>And, for that matter, the public needs to recognize that
forcing a corporation to expend vast dollars to reduce perceived or actual
(but vanishingly small) risk does not generally mean the CEOs will be cutting
short their Mediterranean vacation, but that the product cost will increase
to cover the expenses, and Joe Citizen will still end up paying for it.<<

or, worse yet for those Buy American types: Let them know that the US company
may go out of business, jobs lost, etc, etc. because some foreign company can
produce the goods and/or services for less.  Why? Because the foreign country
has less restrictive, but still health-protective, regulations based on
cost-benefit analyses.  Tell that to Al Gore & his union supporters.

Ernesto Faillace
efaillace@earthlink.net



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