from ray shadis re: lochbaum and radiation

[Norman & Karen Cohen <norco@bellatlantic.net>]

Hi all,

Thanks for all the answers to my last query on the "rad is rad" question. I'll get
back to everyone.

I wanted to share this message from Ray Shadis (he said ok).

Apologies from Ray for the humorous tone of his letter, replying to Dave Lochbaum on
our UNPLUG Salem list, where I've posted some of the "rad is rad" discussion.

Interesting to me is his request for a dialogue on radiobiology. I think that some
of what he says
in here is where my thinking is at too, looking at more biology based models.

peace
norm

Raymond Shadis wrote:

> Gentlemens and Wimmens,
>         My fren Dave don't know diddly about radiation, otherwise he never wouda
> worked ina nuclear industry. As it happens, his answer weren't so bad and
> he's learnin alla time. Ya see, alotta folks hold with the notion of Linear
> Energy Transfer...including our honorable elder, the esteemed Dr Gofman.
> And he does pretty well by it. X in; Y out, X -Y= energy delivered =
> damage. Except for things like energy curves, frequencies, and synergistic
> effects. Except for delivery systems like absorption by target organs.
> Being an old shooting buff, my favorite analogy regarding linear energy
> transfer is simple firearm ballistics: a heavy, slow round like a 45/70
> will break bones and knock a target head-over-heels; a really fast, light
> round like a .223 or a 5.56 mm will go right through a target leaving a
> horrific shock pattern and lots of damage while dumping less than all of
> its energy. If the energy ahead of a projectile (plasma) and the energy
> behind a projectile ( turbulence) can spit be spit out with varying
> intensities and frequence then each isotope will have its own damage
> signature varying with medium and distance and heat and a host of other
> possible variables. So how to determine what's going on? Empirically,
> through controlled experiments at the cellular level and in a broad cause
> and effect analysis.( super-tricky) through epidemiological studies. In the
> meanwhile observe the preventative health practitioner's protocols of less
> exposure to a suspect source of harm. We can also field sample for
> indicators like greater than expected 1st generation chromosomal damage.
> So far each of these investigative protocols indicates we should be more,
> not less, cautious.  We at Friends of the Coast, and this staffer at the
> New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution, are agitating about a biology
> -based, as opposed to a physics based, nomenclature of the biological
> effects of ionizing radiation.  Having read this diatribe, is anyone out
> there game for a dialogue on putting together a theory of radiobiology
> [ecology] from the life end ? Do please think about it. If the idea has
> merit to you and you would like to participate in a forum on radiobiology-a
> life-science approach...Please do get in touch.
>        Raymond Shadis
>
>                            Post Ofice Box 76,
>
>                            Edgecomb, Maine 04556
>
>                            207-882-7801
>

--
Coalition for Peace and Justice and the UNPLUG Salem Campaign; 321 Barr Ave.,
Linwood, NJ 08221; 609-601-8537 or 609-601-8583 (8583: fax, answer machine);
norco@bellatlantic.net;  UNPLUG SALEM WEBSITE:  http://www.unplugsalem.org/
COALITION FOR PEACE AND JUSTICE WEBSITE:  http://members.bellatlantic.net/~norco/
ICQ# 54268619; The Coalition for Peace and Justice is a chapter of Peace Action.
“We have two lives, the one we’re given, and the other one we make” (Mary Chapin
Carpenter)
“Get up, stand up, stand up for your rights...Get up, stand up, don’t give up the
fight!” (Bob Marley)




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