Re: loosing, Tooth Fairy Project

["David Whitfill" <DWhitfil@kdhe.state.ks.us>]

I would suggest reading the position statement of the Health Physics
Society Radiation Risk in Perspective found at

http://www.hps.org/documents/radiationrisk.pdf

Note the pdf format. There are quite a few HPS members in the NRC and EPA
who have a role in making policy-this position statement doesn't seem to
"maintain the perception of potentially serious risks from low-level
radiation."

DJWhitfill

Opinions expressed are mine and do not reflect official policies or
positions of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment.


                                                                                                
                    William V Lipton                                                            
                    <liptonw@dteenergy        To:     Multiple recipients of list               
                    .com>                     <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>                    
                    Sent by:                  cc:                                               
                    radsafe@romulus.eh        Subject:     Re: loosing, Tooth Fairy Project     
                    s.uiuc.edu                                                                  
                                                                                                
                                                                                                
                    08/04/00 10:46 AM                                                           
                    Please respond to                                                           
                    radsafe                                                                     
                                                                                                
                                                                                                




This is a typical knee-jerk reaction.  The government is an easy scapegoat.
If
this has some sort of therapeutic value for you, you're welcome to
continue.
However, I hope that you're not fooling yourself.

Regardless of the merits of current regulations, they are what they are
because
that's what our peers (e.g., BEIR, ICRP, NCRP, ...) have recommended.
Perhaps
the standards were made overly conservative with an eye toward boosting
employment.  Now that these standards are inconvenient, it would not be
credible to suddenly recant them.

The opinions expressed are strictly mine.
It's not about dose, it's about trust.

Bill Lipton
liptonw@dteenergy.com

Ted Rockwell wrote:

> > The EPA, NRC, and similar organizations
> must maintain the perception of potentially serious risks from low-level
> radiation if they are to remain viable.
>
> Amen!
>
> That's why RSH is taking the EPA to court, if necessary, to get this
matter
> resolved.
>
> TR
>
> ************************************************************************
> 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



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