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

Re: LNT

Dear Les,



I have two comments on your post that both support Ruth Weiner's mail: One, the correctness of the LNT has nothing to do with the availability of a

replacement model, it is just plain wrong because it is contradicted by the data; Two, there are a large number of stand-in 'models' available, one

example is imbedded in the HPS position statement on the LNT that is telling us not to evaluate any risks below 10 rems (0.1 Sv) lifetime dose.  This

agrees with the fact that Joe Alvarez and I demonstrated in 1994 in a paper to the First Dixy Lee Ray Memorial Meeting that risks calculated for doses

below 30 - 50 rems (0.3 - 0.5 Sv) are meaningless because they are smaller than their errors!  The simplest replacement is thus a threshold-linear

model that has sometimes been called the hockey stick model, a model that also agrees with the data.



Something to think about, best regards



Fritz







Les Crable wrote:



> Ruth stated, "It has taken a perfectly reasonable number of decades to

> accumulate epidemiological evidence of a threshold, and evidence (like

> Bernard Cohen's) that contradicts the LNT."

>

> Ruth, I have some major concerns about the LNT also, but what do you offer

> as an alternative?  What is the dose response for the various forms (alpha,

> beta, etc.)of radiation? Is there a threshold?  If so, does it apply to all

> types of radiation? Is a possible threshold affected by dose rate?  I do not

> see a good alternative right now.  If you are hanging your hat on Dr.

> COhen's ecologic studies to support dumping the LNT, it is obvious you are

> in a weak stance to defend your view.  No wonder the "establishment" laughs

> when we use examples like Cohen's studies or Muckerheide's obscure journal

> articles to support the position that the LNT should be abandoned.  I don't

> even believe in the validity of the LNT in most cases, but I tend to cling

> to it more when I see the "science" that is being held up to defeat it.

>

> Les Crable

>

> >From: RuthWeiner@AOL.COM

> >Reply-To: RuthWeiner@AOL.COM

> >To: liptonw@DTEENERGY.COM

> >CC: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

> >Subject: Re: LNT

> >Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 09:35:46 EST

> >

> >In a message dated 1/14/02 5:32:06 AM Mountain Standard Time,

> >liptonw@dteenergy.com writes:

> >

> >

> > > I fail to understand how whomever "wins" this debate will affect

> >anything

> > > other than the egos of those involved.

> >

> >Au contraire,as a colleague of mine used to say!  If LNT is ditched, the

> >standards can be redone to be reasonable and a great deal of mooney can be

> >put to better use.  I don't think it's an "ego" thing at all.

> >

> >  At the risk of repeating myself too often (However, if no one's

> >listening,

> >am I really

> > > repeating myself - let's debate that!), we have no one but ourselves to

> > > blame for any overly restrictive standards.  When generous research

> >funding

> > > was available, it was expedient to promote LNT as a means of procuring

> >more

> > > than our fair share.  Well, strange bedfellows always look a lot worse

> >the

> > > morning after!  It's too late to change this, however.

> > >

> >This is almost un believably small-minded.  The LNT was initially presented

> >as a reasonably conservatiuve "working hypothesis."  It was as necessary to

> >research the health effects of ionizing radiation as the health effects of

> >exposure to tuberculosis or yellow fever.  It has taken a perfectly

> >reasonable number of decades to accumulate epidemiological evidence of a

> >threshold, and evidence (like Bernard Cohen's) that contradicts the LNT.

> >

> >Ruth Weiner, Ph. D.

> >ruthweiner@aol.com

>

> _________________________________________________________________

> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.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. You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/



--



 " The American Republic will endure until the day Congress

 discovers that it can bribe the Public with the Public's money."

                                       Alexis de Tocqueville

                                       Democracy in America



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



Fritz A. Seiler, Ph.D.

Sigma Five Consulting

P.O. Box 1709

Los Lunas, NM 87031, USA

Tel.    505-866-5193

Fax.    505-866-5197

e-mail: faseiler@nmia.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. You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/