Re: RADSAFE digest 3135

[Holloway3@aol.com]

<< The info for the technique might be on the webpage: www.radiation.org
 I don't recall exactly, it was something like a spellation counter, but that
 might not be the correct name for the machine.
  >>

I think they are using a liquid scintillation counter.  The choice of  teeth 
to the exclusion of other samples is an odd one.  One would think that if 
they suspect emissions from nuclear power plants, that they should take 
environmental samples such as water and air, in the vicinity of the alleged 
offending plant.  Radiation is easy to measure but except for this tooth 
project, the critics have almost never resorted to measurements.  I guess 
talk is much cheaper.  Mangano's paper is a bad one, well deserving of the 
phrase "junk science"  and I would hope that those who agree with that will 
make their views known to the journal.  I intend to do just that.  Norm, 
could you tell us why your people have made so few measurements in the 
vicinity of nuclear power plants?  That is an oddity that deserves some 
comment from your side. 

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