Re: risk perception chart on-line (Worries: Yours vs. Experts)

["Bjorn Cedervall" <bcradsafers@HOTMAIL.COM>]

>And where did they get the "experts?"



>X-rays = 7 ?!

>Nuclear power = 20?  more hazardous than

>Food coloring = 21, Home appliances = 22, Hunting = 23

----

Oops: I apologize - I was not aware of that the numbers were already out 

there in Radsafers land. Anyway, besides many arguments that can be made, 

the SCIENCE issue about risks (Oct. 1985) contains a lot to read and think 

about (pages 29-47). Of course many of the risk factors mentioned in the 

table must be controversial (food coloring, food preservatives, 

pesticides...).



Some risks can partially be avoided, example: On the average only a few 

(zero to say about 3 I believe) people annually die from lightening in 

Sweden. So the average risk is low but when the storm is actually there the 

risk can be much higher per unit time depending on what you actually do (I 

am thinking about the three people who were struck by lightening in the 

Stockholm area two days ago, two of whom died: One bicyclist and one person 

holding an umbrella).



Bjorn Cedervall   bcradsafers@hotmail.com





_________________________________________________________________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp



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

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.