RE: Shipyard workers and references

[Jack_Earley@RL.GOV]

I was conducting rad. training in the Navy in the 70s, and part of the bio.

effects training included an estimate that each rem of radiation would

statistically shorten your lifespan by 1 day.



Jack Earley

Radiological Engineer





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

From: Muckerheide [mailto:muckerheide@MEDIAONE.NET]

Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2001 9:05 PM

To: jenday1; RADSAFE

Subject: Re: Shipyard workers and references





 From: "jenday1" <jenday1@EMAIL.MSN.COM>



> Ted,

> Did the results not agree with the LNT, or was it a poorly study?  The

> latter is the criticism I heard.

Only after the fact; documented disinformation (for the gullible?)



>It makes no sense that if radiation caused

> cancer deaths, and the AEC(?) and Navy wanted to set the record straight,

> why would they want to bury the report?



Same reason you do. Defeating LNT means changing rules and giving up a gravy

train of funding!



>Do you think the Navy and DOE want to pay people for radiation-induced

cancers?

Small price to keep the $$100s Millions TAXPAYER  funds flowing.



> That is certainly not the Navy I served in.

Seems unlikely "the Navy" figured you had a "need to know."



>They would want to proclaim to the world that their program

> protected rather than harmed the workers.



See study results that show large increases in mesothelioma from asbestos in

nuke and non-nuke workers!  People involved report that the Navy didn't want

that out (and not up to the Navy Nuke people!)



> Even if did not support the LNT, the fact that radiation-induced cancers

> could be identified would do more damage, both finacially and politically.

> Your arguement for suppression seems backwards.

Right. But they're not trying to destroy their programs. You need a more

comprehensive and objective view; and consider the info that program

participants have provided!



Jim

 

> 

> --John

> 

> John Jacobus, MS

> Certified Health Physicist

> 3050 Traymore Lane

> Bowie, MD 20715-2024

> jenday1@email.msn.com (H)

> 

> 

> Ted Rockwell wrote:

> 

> The reason that the Nuclear Shipyard Study was undertaken was in response

to

> the earlier, partial and poorly run studies you cited.  A great splash was

> made in the Boston papers about cancer among the shipyard workers.  So the

> Atomic Energy Commission and the Navy determined to do it right.  It was

> assigned to the Epidemiology School at Johns Hopkins, Upton was put in

> charge of the Technical Advisory Panel with other top experts in the

field,

> and they met periodically throughout the long period of the study, to make

> it the best possible study of this large and carefully monitored

population.

> And it was.  The only problem was that it did not give the expected (LNT)

> answer.  So they tried to bury it.

> 

> . . .

> 

> ************************************************************************

> 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.

> 



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

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.

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

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. You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/