[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Sternglass/Gould/Tooth Fairy/NCI "DOE-Watch"--FYI



The National Cancer Institute is a division of NIH and is funded by federal
funds.

http://www.nci.nih.gov/aboutnci/index.html

Ruth Weiner
ruth_weiner@msn.com
-----Original Message-----
From: RadiumProj@cs.com <RadiumProj@cs.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
Date: Monday, October 16, 2000 9:37 AM
Subject: Sternglass/Gould/Tooth Fairy/NCI "DOE-Watch"--FYI


>
>--part1_e2.b079072.271c7a71_boundary
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>Radsafe:
>For those of you not familiar with it, a posting to an anti-nuclear
bulletin
>board called DOEWatch is copied below, which includes some comments by Dr.
>Sternglass and Jay Gould to a question posed about NCI having found no
>increase in cancer rates around nuclear reactors. The comment by Gould
makes
>reference to an article about the Tooth Fairy Project which I have not yet
>looked at which was Gould  states published by Johns Hopkins University.
>Worth looking at. I noted in looking at the DOEWatch site that Norman
Cohen,
>who had posed so many "questions" to radsafe a while back,  was a frequent
>poster to DOEWatch and made a number of posts about goading the Radsafers.
>
>As the old saw says: "know your enemies".
>
>The distribution for this post also gives the email address for a number of
>individual environment/nuclear staff media contacts [NY Times,  Tennessean,
&
>others] that may be of interest to some.
>
>Stewart Farber
>Public Health Sciences
>email: radiumproj@cs.com
>==================
>In a message dated 10/15/00 9:30:30 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>smirnowb@ix.netcom.com writes:
>
>> Subj:  [DOEWatch] REPLYS FROM DR STERNGLASS & DR GOULD RE National Cancer
>> Institute STUDY OF CANCERS AROUND REACTORS
>>  Date:    10/15/00 9:30:30 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>>  From:    smirnowb@ix.netcom.com (Bill Smirnow)
>>  To:  Nucnews@egroups.com (Nucnews List), nukenet@envirolink.org
(Nukenet),
>> downwinders@egroups.com (Downwinders List), doewatch@egroups.com
(DOE-Watch
>> List), Abolition-Caucus@egroups.com (Abolition-Caucus)
>>  CC:  sthomas@usnews.com (Media/US News & World Report),
lschuster@upi.com (
>> Media/UPI), annem@progressive.org (Media/The Progressive), sbegle@nwnet.
>> newsweek.com (Media/Newsweek), manning@lasvegassun.com (Media/Mary
Manning/
>> Las Vegas Sun), lfrank@tennessean.com (Media/Luara Frank/ Tennessean),
oped@
>> csps.com (Media/Christian Science Monitor), Mattwald@nytimes.com (Matt
>Media/
>> Wald)
>>
>>
>>  ----- Original Message -----
>>  From: <MSSEJS@aol.com>
>>  To: <smirnowb@ix.netcom.com>
>>  Cc: <jbbrown@gate.net>; <JayMGould@aol.com>; <Odiejoe@aol.com>;
>>  <Toxdocjs@aol.com>; <hdsharma@golden.net>
>>  Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2000 6:08 PM
>>  Subject: NCI STUDY OF CANCERS AROUND REACTORS
>>
>>  Dr Sternglass wrote:
>>
>>
>>  > Bill:
>>  >
>>  > You should know that our book"The Enemy Within" by Jay M Gould et al.
>>  (Four
>>  > Walls Eight Windows, NY 1996) shows that in fact there was a large and
>>  highly
>>  > significant increase in breast cancer mortality rates not only around
all
>>  old
>>  > DOE facilities with nuclear reactors of 37% between 1950-54 and1985-89
>>  > compared with a 1% rise for the U.S. as a whole (Table7-1, page 129)
but
>>  also
>>  > a highly significant rise for all nuclear reactors when the area
studied
>>  is
>>  > extended to a 50 mile radius (Table 7-2, page 131).
>>  >
>>  > The original NCI methodology used only one or two counties for each
>>  reactor,
>>  > and compared the rate of cancer deaths with 3 selected counties, a
>>  majority
>>  > of which were adjacent to the county with reactors, so that they all
rose
>>  > together, allowing the NCI to say that with the methodology used,
"there
>>  was
>>  > no difference between reactor and control counties". The book is
>available
>>  at
>>  > low cost from Jerry Brown, Executive Director of RPHP..
>(jbbrown@gate.net)
>>  or
>>  > any internet book site.
>>  >
>>  > Ernest J. Sternglass
>>  > mssejs@aol.com
>>
>>
>>
>>      Dr. Jay  Gould wrote:
>>
>>      > please refer to Appendix D of the Rphp publication of The Enemy
>>  Within:
>>  the
>>  > High Cost of living Near Nuclear Reactors for a demonstration of the
>>  > dishonesty of the NCI and the infamous Jablon report that with their
>>  bizarre
>>  > methodology no one could find evidence of harm because they compared
each
>>  > county in which a reactor was placed with a "control" county near
another
>>  > reactor assuming that emissions would not ever cross county
boundaries.
>>  > Also, Bill why dont you tell those on your valuable list serve about
our
>>  web
>>  > site www.radiation.org which now carries the definitive article
published
>>  by
>>  > the Johns Hopkins Shool of Public Health on the results of our Tooth
>Fairy
>>  > Project----Jay M Gould
>>
>>
>>     Bill Smirnow wrote:
>>
>>        >  Does anyone have data as to just how NCI is funded? NCI's
>statement
>>  >&
>>  >NRC's acceptance thereof is an obvious murderous lie being perpetrated
>>  >on
>>  >the public. http://www.geocities.com/mothersalert/infant.html
>>  >
>>  >They make no comment on the 10 DOE sites that NCI looked at & any
>>  >cancer
>>  >rates from "low-level" radiation. What do we make from this no comment
>>  >policy re DOE sites?
>>  >
>>  > -Bill Smirnow
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >    Additionally, the National Cancer Institute, at the request of
>>  >Congress,
>>  >conducted a study1 of 52 nuclear power stations and 10 Department of
>>  >Energy
>>  >facilities.  The study concluded that there was no increase in cancers
>>  >in
>>  >the communities surrounding the nuclear power plants.
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >----- Original Message -----
>>  >From: "DRPM/PDLR DRPM/PDLR" <DRPM/PDLR@nrc.gov>
>>  >To: <smirnowb@ix.netcom.com>
>>  >Sent: Friday, October 13, 2000 4:55 PM
>>  >Subject: Public Comment on draft regulatory guidance on license
>>  >renewal
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >Mr. Smirnow:
>>  >
>>  >Thank you for your comments on the renewal of nuclear power plants
>>  >operating
>>  >licenses received via the NRC website.
>>  >
>>  >The Atomic Energy Act established a 40-year license term for power
>>  >reactors,
>>  >but also provided that such licenses could be renewed.  Public comment
>>  >was
>>  >sought when the regulations were amended in 1991 and 1995  to include
>>  >a
>>  >process for renewal in Part 54 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal
>>  >Regulations.  Public comment was also sought when the associated
>>  >environmental impact requirements in Part 51 were amended for license
>>  >renewal in 1996.
>>  >
>>  >The license renewal requirements provide for a plant-specific
>>  >determination
>>  >that aging effects can be adequately managed during the period of
>>  >extended
>>  >operation.  The NRC is currently seeking public comment on updated
>>  >guidance
>>  >for the evaluation of plant-specific applications for license renewal,
>>  >including a report on generic aging lessons learned (GALL).  Recent
>>  >media
>>  >reports erroneously described this guidance as the only opportunity
>>  >for
>>  >public comment for license renewal.  The NRC requested comments on the
>>  >updated renewal guidance by October 16, 2000 in preparation for a
>>  >meeting of
>>  >the Nuclear Regulatory Commission planned for December 5, 2000, to
>>  >specifically discuss the extent to which existing inspection and
>>  >maintenance
>>  >activities need to be augmented for license renewal.
>>  >
>>  >Comments on the license renewal guidance submitted after that date
>>  >will be
>>  >considered to the extent practical up to the time the proposed final
>>  >guidance is submitted to the Commission for approval, presently
>>  >scheduled
>>  >for March 2001.
>>  >
>>  >The license renewal process provides for individual hearings, public
>>  >meetings and a request for public comment in the vicinity of each
>>  >plant that
>>  >submits a license renewal application.
>>  >
>>  >Additional information about the license renewal process and related
>>  >evaluation guidance is available on the NRC webpage at
>>  ><http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/REACTOR/LR/index.html>.
>>  >
>>  >With respect to "low-level" radiation, NRC regulations require
>>  >licensees to
>>  >have effluent and environmental monitoring programs (to quantify
>>  >releases
>>  >and their impact on the environment) to ensure that the impacts from
>>  >plant
>>  >operations are minimized.  The results of these programs are reported
>>  >annually and available to the public.  The permitted effluent releases
>>  >result in very small doses to members of the public living around the
>>  >plants
>>  >(small fractions of the public dose limit).  Regional NRC inspectors
>>  >routinely inspect these monitoring programs to ensure continued
>>  >compliance
>>  >with regulatory requirements.  Licensees are required to participate
>>  >in an
>>  >interlaboratory comparison program which provides an independent check
>>  >on
>>  >the accuracy and precision of the environmental measurements.
>>  >Additionally,
>>  >the National Cancer Institute, at the request of Congress, conducted a
>>  >study1 of 52 nuclear power stations and 10 Department of Energy
>>  >facilities.
>>  >The study concluded that there was no increase in cancers in the
>>  >communities
>>  >surrounding the nuclear power plants.
>>  >
>>  >License Renewal and Standardization Branch
>>  >Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
>>  >United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission
>>  >
>>  >1: "Cancer in Populations Living Near Nuclear Facilities," Jablon, et
>>  >al.,
>>  >National Cancer Institute, July 1990. [NIH Publication No. 90-874]
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  -------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
>>  eGroups eLerts
>>  It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
>>  http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/4/_/488116/_/971670602/
>>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
>>
>>  DOEWatch List ----A Magnum-Opus Project ---  The real Natl. Sec.
Directive
>>  Subscribe online: http://www.onelist.com
>>  -based near the cryptic named  X-10 [god and ten commandments] and Y-12
[
>> yahweh and disciples] nuke weapons plants of the nuclear tabernacle of
Oak
>> Ridge.
>>
>>  "If the radiance of a thousand suns were to burst at once into the sky
>>  That would be like the splendor of the Mighty one...
>>  I am become Death, The shatterer of Worlds."
>>  -Oppenheimer July 16, 45 at Trinity from 5,000 year old Bhagavad-Gita
>>
>>  "We have discovered the most terrible bomb in the history of the world.
>It
>> may be the fire destruction prophesized in the Euphrates Valley Era,
after
>> Noah and his fabulous Ark.  Anyway we think we have found the way to
cause
>> the disintegration of the atom."
>>   -Quote from Truman's diary July 25, 45 after Pottsdam and the "baby was
>> born" and grew into "Little Boy" and "Fat Man" and the hydrogen bomb
>> delivered by bomber named  "Dave's Dream."  Enola Gay's pilot, after
>> Hiroshima,  enters "My God' in the log.
>>
>>  "The Doctor of the future will give No Medicine, but will interest his
>> patients in the care of the human frame, in diet, and in the cause and
>> prevention of disease."
>>  -Attributed to Thomas Alva Edison
>>
>>  "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary
act"
>>  -George Orwell
>>
>>  The Manhattan Project commited war crimes in killing Amazon and Panama
>> natives in nuke bomb and isotope tests.
>>
>>  Oak Ridge uses ole hippie activists to hide its HF emissions and war
>crimes.
>>
>>  The actual setting for the "Three Faces of Eve" was Oak Ridge.  Now its
>also
>> a setting for "The Simpsons."
>>
>>  DOEWatch page:    http://members.aol.com/doewatch
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>--part1_e2.b079072.271c7a71_boundary
>Content-Type: message/rfc822
>Content-Disposition: inline
>
>Return-Path:
<sentto-13394-9590-971670602-radiumproj=cs.com@returns.onelist.com>
>Received: from  rly-za04.mx.aol.com (rly-za04.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.100])
by air-za01.mail.aol.com (v76_r1.19) with ESMTP; Mon, 16 Oct 2000
00:30:30 -0400
>Received: from  ej.egroups.com (ej.egroups.com [208.50.144.75]) by
rly-za04.mx.aol.com (v76_r1.19) with ESMTP; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 00:30:04 -0400
>X-eGroups-Return:
sentto-13394-9590-971670602-radiumproj=cs.com@returns.onelist.com
>Received: from [10.1.10.35] by ej.egroups.com with NNFMP; 16 Oct 2000
04:30:08 -0000
>X-Sender: smirnowb@ix.netcom.com
>X-Apparently-To: doewatch@egroups.com
>Received: (EGP: mail-6_1_0); 16 Oct 2000 04:30:01 -0000
>Received: (qmail 18194 invoked from network); 16 Oct 2000 04:30:01 -0000
>Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m1.onelist.org with QMQP; 16 Oct
2000 04:30:01 -0000
>Received: from unknown (HELO smtp10.atl.mindspring.net) (207.69.200.246) by
mta3 with SMTP; 16 Oct 2000 04:30:01 -0000
>Received: from BILLSNEWCOMPUTER (user-2ivecmi.dialup.mindspring.com
[165.247.50.210]) by smtp10.atl.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with SMTP id
AAA16683; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 00:29:44 -0400 (EDT)
>Message-ID: <009901c03729$b24fb990$d232f7a5@BILLSNEWCOMPUTER>
>To: "Nucnews List" <Nucnews@egroups.com>, "Nukenet"
<nukenet@envirolink.org>,
>        "Downwinders List" <downwinders@egroups.com>,
>        "DOE-Watch List" <doewatch@egroups.com>,
>        "Abolition-Caucus" <Abolition-Caucus@egroups.com>
>Cc: "Media/US News & World Report" <sthomas@usnews.com>,
>        "Media/UPI" <lschuster@upi.com>,
>        "Media/The Progressive" <annem@progressive.org>,
>        "Media/Newsweek" <sbegle@nwnet.newsweek.com>,
>        "Media/Mary Manning/Las Vegas Sun" <manning@lasvegassun.com>,
>        "Media/Luara Frank/ Tennessean" <lfrank@tennessean.com>,
>        "Media/Christian Science Monitor" <oped@csps.com>,
>        "Matt Media/Wald" <Mattwald@nytimes.com>
>X-Priority: 3
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700
>From: "Bill Smirnow" <smirnowb@ix.netcom.com>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Mailing-List: list doewatch@egroups.com; contact doewatch-owner@egroups.com
>Delivered-To: mailing list doewatch@egroups.com
>Precedence: bulk
>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:doewatch-unsubscribe@egroups.com>
>Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 00:29:25 -0400
>Subject: [DOEWatch] REPLYS FROM DR STERNGLASS & DR GOULD RE National Cancer
Institute STUDY OF CANCERS AROUND REACTORS
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <MSSEJS@aol.com>
>To: <smirnowb@ix.netcom.com>
>Cc: <jbbrown@gate.net>; <JayMGould@aol.com>; <Odiejoe@aol.com>;
><Toxdocjs@aol.com>; <hdsharma@golden.net>
>Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2000 6:08 PM
>Subject: NCI STUDY OF CANCERS AROUND REACTORS
>
>Dr Sternglass wrote:
>
>
>> Bill:
>>
>> You should know that our book"The Enemy Within" by Jay M Gould et al.
>(Four
>> Walls Eight Windows, NY 1996) shows that in fact there was a large and
>highly
>> significant increase in breast cancer mortality rates not only around all
>old
>> DOE facilities with nuclear reactors of 37% between 1950-54 and1985-89
>> compared with a 1% rise for the U.S. as a whole (Table7-1, page 129) but
>also
>> a highly significant rise for all nuclear reactors when the area studied
>is
>> extended to a 50 mile radius (Table 7-2, page 131).
>>
>> The original NCI methodology used only one or two counties for each
>reactor,
>> and compared the rate of cancer deaths with 3 selected counties, a
>majority
>> of which were adjacent to the county with reactors, so that they all rose
>> together, allowing the NCI to say that with the methodology used, "there
>was
>> no difference between reactor and control counties". The book is
available
>at
>> low cost from Jerry Brown, Executive Director of RPHP..
(jbbrown@gate.net)
>or
>> any internet book site.
>>
>> Ernest J. Sternglass
>> mssejs@aol.com
>
>
>
>    Dr. Jay  Gould wrote:
>
>    > please refer to Appendix D of the Rphp publication of The Enemy
>Within:
>the
>> High Cost of living Near Nuclear Reactors for a demonstration of the
>> dishonesty of the NCI and the infamous Jablon report that with their
>bizarre
>> methodology no one could find evidence of harm because they compared each
>> county in which a reactor was placed with a "control" county near another
>> reactor assuming that emissions would not ever cross county boundaries.
>> Also, Bill why dont you tell those on your valuable list serve about our
>web
>> site www.radiation.org which now carries the definitive article published
>by
>> the Johns Hopkins Shool of Public Health on the results of our Tooth
Fairy
>> Project----Jay M Gould
>
>
>   Bill Smirnow wrote:
>
>      >  Does anyone have data as to just how NCI is funded? NCI's
statement
>>&
>>NRC's acceptance thereof is an obvious murderous lie being perpetrated
>>on
>>the public. http://www.geocities.com/mothersalert/infant.html
>>
>>They make no comment on the 10 DOE sites that NCI looked at & any
>>cancer
>>rates from "low-level" radiation. What do we make from this no comment
>>policy re DOE sites?
>>
>> -Bill Smirnow
>>
>>
>>    Additionally, the National Cancer Institute, at the request of
>>Congress,
>>conducted a study1 of 52 nuclear power stations and 10 Department of
>>Energy
>>facilities.  The study concluded that there was no increase in cancers
>>in
>>the communities surrounding the nuclear power plants.
>>
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "DRPM/PDLR DRPM/PDLR" <DRPM/PDLR@nrc.gov>
>>To: <smirnowb@ix.netcom.com>
>>Sent: Friday, October 13, 2000 4:55 PM
>>Subject: Public Comment on draft regulatory guidance on license
>>renewal
>>
>>
>>Mr. Smirnow:
>>
>>Thank you for your comments on the renewal of nuclear power plants
>>operating
>>licenses received via the NRC website.
>>
>>The Atomic Energy Act established a 40-year license term for power
>>reactors,
>>but also provided that such licenses could be renewed.  Public comment
>>was
>>sought when the regulations were amended in 1991 and 1995  to include
>>a
>>process for renewal in Part 54 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal
>>Regulations.  Public comment was also sought when the associated
>>environmental impact requirements in Part 51 were amended for license
>>renewal in 1996.
>>
>>The license renewal requirements provide for a plant-specific
>>determination
>>that aging effects can be adequately managed during the period of
>>extended
>>operation.  The NRC is currently seeking public comment on updated
>>guidance
>>for the evaluation of plant-specific applications for license renewal,
>>including a report on generic aging lessons learned (GALL).  Recent
>>media
>>reports erroneously described this guidance as the only opportunity
>>for
>>public comment for license renewal.  The NRC requested comments on the
>>updated renewal guidance by October 16, 2000 in preparation for a
>>meeting of
>>the Nuclear Regulatory Commission planned for December 5, 2000, to
>>specifically discuss the extent to which existing inspection and
>>maintenance
>>activities need to be augmented for license renewal.
>>
>>Comments on the license renewal guidance submitted after that date
>>will be
>>considered to the extent practical up to the time the proposed final
>>guidance is submitted to the Commission for approval, presently
>>scheduled
>>for March 2001.
>>
>>The license renewal process provides for individual hearings, public
>>meetings and a request for public comment in the vicinity of each
>>plant that
>>submits a license renewal application.
>>
>>Additional information about the license renewal process and related
>>evaluation guidance is available on the NRC webpage at
>><http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/REACTOR/LR/index.html>.
>>
>>With respect to "low-level" radiation, NRC regulations require
>>licensees to
>>have effluent and environmental monitoring programs (to quantify
>>releases
>>and their impact on the environment) to ensure that the impacts from
>>plant
>>operations are minimized.  The results of these programs are reported
>>annually and available to the public.  The permitted effluent releases
>>result in very small doses to members of the public living around the
>>plants
>>(small fractions of the public dose limit).  Regional NRC inspectors
>>routinely inspect these monitoring programs to ensure continued
>>compliance
>>with regulatory requirements.  Licensees are required to participate
>>in an
>>interlaboratory comparison program which provides an independent check
>>on
>>the accuracy and precision of the environmental measurements.
>>Additionally,
>>the National Cancer Institute, at the request of Congress, conducted a
>>study1 of 52 nuclear power stations and 10 Department of Energy
>>facilities.
>>The study concluded that there was no increase in cancers in the
>>communities
>>surrounding the nuclear power plants.
>>
>>License Renewal and Standardization Branch
>>Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
>>United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission
>>
>>1: "Cancer in Populations Living Near Nuclear Facilities," Jablon, et
>>al.,
>>National Cancer Institute, July 1990. [NIH Publication No. 90-874]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
>eGroups eLerts
>It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
>http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/4/_/488116/_/971670602/
>---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
>
>DOEWatch List ----A Magnum-Opus Project ---  The real Natl. Sec. Directive
>Subscribe online: http://www.onelist.com
>-based near the cryptic named  X-10 [god and ten commandments] and Y-12
>[yahweh and disciples] nuke weapons plants of the nuclear tabernacle of Oak
>Ridge.
>
>"If the radiance of a thousand suns were to burst at once into the sky
>That would be like the splendor of the Mighty one...
>I am become Death, The shatterer of Worlds."
>-Oppenheimer July 16, 45 at Trinity from 5,000 year old Bhagavad-Gita
>
>"We have discovered the most terrible bomb in the history of the world.  It
>may be the fire destruction prophesized in the Euphrates Valley Era, after
>Noah and his fabulous Ark.  Anyway we think we have found the way to cause
>the disintegration of the atom."
> -Quote from Truman's diary July 25, 45 after Pottsdam and the "baby was
>born" and grew into "Little Boy" and "Fat Man" and the hydrogen bomb
>delivered by bomber named  "Dave's Dream."  Enola Gay's pilot, after
>Hiroshima,  enters "My God' in the log.
>
>"The Doctor of the future will give No Medicine, but will interest his
>patients in the care of the human frame, in diet, and in the cause and
>prevention of disease."
>-Attributed to Thomas Alva Edison
>
>"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act"
>-George Orwell
>
>The Manhattan Project commited war crimes in killing Amazon and Panama
>natives in nuke bomb and isotope tests.
>
>Oak Ridge uses ole hippie activists to hide its HF emissions and war
crimes.
>
>The actual setting for the "Three Faces of Eve" was Oak Ridge.  Now its
also
>a setting for "The Simpsons."
>
>DOEWatch page:    http://members.aol.com/doewatch
>
>
>--part1_e2.b079072.271c7a71_boundary--
>************************************************************************
>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