Re: "The eyes of the beholder" / ICRP, quality factors etc

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

From: "Jerry Cohen" <jjcohen@prodigy.net>

Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 10:37:26 -0800



 > The transparency of the ICRP work provides a valuable opportunity to

suggest constructive improvements & changes without propagandistic 

overtunes.

---

People I trust provide information

People I don't trust provide propaganda



---

I agree with these comments as a more general thing but I am not sure how to 

interpret them in this particular context - if you are referring to the 

people providing ICRP with input or the ICRP itself. When I wrote about 

"propagandistic overtunes" I referred to the input.



Regardless of which, it is important to notice that we can influence the 

ICRP in a way that has not been possible before. That chance should not be 

missed. Remember also that ICRP is a dynamic system for radiation protection 

- there is a historical context that to a large extent can be undestood but 

now has reached a stage of complexity and need for revision - and thus there 

is a future.



This is a good thing because ICRP will now take more of radiation physics 

and biology into account (track structures, critical targets etc). Without 

that we will never get a consistent picture.



Remember that "information" is about the data we have which includes studies 

of single ionizing "particles" passing through cell nuclei etc.



My personal reflections only,



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.