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

Re: LNT and hormesis



Give him an atta-boy folks, the man speaks truth.
 
 
"In science there is only physics; everything else is stamp collecting."
                                      --Ernest Rutherford
 
Dean Chaney, CHP, IBA (aka High Plains Drifter)
Fairfield, CA
magna1@jps.net
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 4:30 PM
Subject: LNT and hormesis

NRC dose limits are 5 rem for occupational workers and 100 mrem to the public. These limits are reasonable and readily achievable dose limits regardless of LNT or hormesis. Appendix B is based on ICRP 30 and should be updated regardless of dose response theory.

The EPA has limits of 4 and 10 mrem on the books. Those limits are not reasonable regardless of the LNT argument.

OSHA uses 1950’s MPC guidelines of ICRP 2.  They should be discarded or modernized regardless of LNT.

Reduced limits due to hypothetical multiple pathways and/or overly conservative pathway modeling is very expensive regardless of LNT or hormesis theory.

Just my personal thoughts,

Brian Keele



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