RE: NCRP 136

["Ted Rockwell" <tedrock@CPCUG.ORG>]

> the focus is on DNA affects because that is the

>most obvious effect to demonstrate, and is believed to be the underlying

>source of radiation effects.



That is simply untrue.  In the presence of millions of metabolism-induced

mutations, the few additional radiation-induced mutations have negligible

effect.  Whether you get cancer is determined by how effectively the body's

defenses work.  When the radiation stimulates these defenses, it reduces not

only the number of radiation-induced mutations but also the much larger

number of metabolism-induced mutations.



It is also untrue that "that is what we know the most about."  Very careful

laboratory work by Mitchel, Liu and many others shows in detail how this

works.  Those reports are not cited.



When credible work reaches unequivocal conclusions, that work must either be

accepted or specifically refuted.  Vague generic objections are not

adequate. That is what NCRP, BEIR and the other specially-picked committees

conspicuously fail to do, year after year.  And all their arguments about

the linearity of dose response at high levels are irrelevant, and their

statements about the impossibility of finding data at low levels are refuted

by the data they refuse to evaluate.



Some scientists object to pointing out this glaring deficiency, but those

same scientists have stopped sending in comments on draft NCRP and BEIR

reports.  When asked why, they reply that everyone knows the committees have

made up their minds before their first meeting and have consistently failed

to evaluate the relevant data.



Ted Rockwell



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

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.