Re: radon - documentation of exposure histories for Iowa study

[AndrewsJP@AOL.COM]

In a message dated 1/15/2002 5:48:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, healthrad@HOTMAIL.COM writes:



> I can't believe there are 2000 people on this list, who sit there day after 
>
> day and put up with Muckerheide's postings, without questioning the validity 
>
> of his statements. This will not change until the list owner takes control 
>
> of the list from Muckerheide or does Muckerheide's views represent the 
>
> majority of HPs views?


I find it absolutely fascinating to see this dialogue going on.  Aside from the few bad manners, it is enlightening for most of us "other 2000."  The free discussion in an open forum is the embodiement of science and research.  If we are to limit ourselves to only one view, there would be no more research and no science.  Keep it up, all of you.  I, for one, read it all and try to learn both sides.  We all recognize that trying to assess impact at very low doses is difficult.  In the long run, the economics of overestimating low dose impacts are huge and are a tax on the entire nuclear industry.  The lower the doses we must deal with the higher the marginal tax rate and the more impact it has.



John Andrews

Knoxville, Tennessee