The Secret Word - a possible answer

[nick.tsurikov@ILUKA.COM]

- --part1_6b.115b1408.27e67704_boundary

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit





Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 07:55:57 +0800

From: "Tsurikov, Nick" <nick.tsurikov@ILUKA.COM>

Subject: The Secret Word - a possible answer



Hello, Radsafers



It seems to me that we are back to where we were 2-5-10 etc. years ago...



>From my personal point of view one of possible ways to credibly

prove/disprove the validity of LNT is a MAJOR epidemiological study

addressing possible effects of radiation exposure in 'non-nuclear'

industries.  There were, are and will be much more workers in these

industries receiving doses of the same magnitude as "nuclear" workers, and

much more than dentists, radiographers, etc.; and a study of this kind would

not be such a problem (at least that's how it looks from here).

So, I was wondering - there are so many universities, government

departments, research institutions and nobody thought about that...?



Just my personal thoughts...



Kind regards

Nick Tsurikov

Eneabba, Western Australia 

http://eneabba.net/ <http://eneabba.net/>  







                -----Original Message-----

                From:   Sandy Perle [mailto:sandyfl@EARTHLINK.NET]

<mailto:[mailto:sandyfl@EARTHLINK.NET]> 

                Sent:   Monday, 19 March 2001 1:50

                To:     tedrock@CPCUG.ORG; <mailto:tedrock@CPCUG.ORG;>

radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu <mailto:radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu> 

                Subject:        RE: "The Secret Word"



                The battle isn't here on Radsafe. The battle must be fought

in the 

                trenches. The battle must be first won by reputable

scientists who 

                have in the past, continued to foster the notion that

radiation, even 

                at the minutest amounts, will cause a higher increase in

illness 

                and in some cases, even death, now coming out and stating

that 

                their hypothesis was simply incorrect. Until this happens,

and 

                those organizations who harbor these scientists, as though

they 

                are God, the debate will continue, and legislation will

continue to 

                be based on a false hypothesis. I'm a pessimist. I firmly

believe 

                that not only is the current positions of many of the

scientists and 

                institutions wrong, it will not get any better, but in

reality, will 

                actually get worse. The indicators are very clear. Increased



                regulatory scrutiny and actions taken when there is no

identifiable 

                harm determined. Legislation moving to reduce allowable

radiation 

                exposure, based on input from the "learned" institutions.



- -------------------------------------------------------------------------

************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.



------------------------------