Re: " U.N. Studies Chernobyl Aftermath "

[hflong@postoffice.pacbell.net]

Physicians used to expect, "Trust - not [knowledge of] Dose".

Aren't you glad we don't [usually] now?

Should HPs also educate the public?



Howard Long



Jim Muckerheide wrote:



> Hi Bill,

>

> Unfortunately your philosophy can't be sustained. It goes against everything a technological society knows and does. It's essentially a theological position.

>

> "Trust, not dose" leads you to promise perfection and be guilty and culpable when we aren't perfect. Actually because the philosophy is so extreme, it's even based on promulgating the lie that any dose is too much (any "error" is a failure), so even trivial events are "disasters" (as you see from some of the medical misadministrations that do/will/must occur). The result becomes to withholding public benefits to satisfy a biased premise (that rewards only those who promulgate the false perception of public "risk").

>

> But in the real world, low doses aren't significant (the level is critical to the "debate" since even of the LNT were true there would be no significance to doses that are lost within the variations of background radiation.) But in biology and hazards terms, we have succeeded in being essentially "perfect" because we don't expose people to undue adverse effects (with minimal hazards and risks in moderately high doses from medical therapies), with few/negligible actual consequence "errors." Yet we have misled the public/politicians to expend millions of times more public resources on an activity that has essentially NO adverse effects (all occupational PLUS public deaths of about 2/year over decades), while great hazards and consequences (thousands of deaths/year) effect specific workers and the public from activities that could be ameliorated at a cost of a few dollars to a few hundred dollars/year per death avoided.

>

> Since most people in this business know this with certainty, I'm surprized there isn't more consideration of the moral dilemma. OTOH, I've gotten more recognition of that from people who chose to leave the profession, with disappointment in the lack of attention (if not outright hostility) among their peers and superiors in thier jobs and professional societies (especially also in academics!?) I wonder about people like Robley Evans or Harald Rossi appearing at the gate of heaven, then seeing Ed Radford, K.Z. Morgan etc. facing a life's personal culpability for the consequences of their actions!? :-)

>

> Regards, Jim

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: William V Lipton [mailto:liptonw@DTEENERGY.COM]

>

> You folks still don't get it.  It's not whether Chernobyl killed 2000, 8000, 30000, or "only" 100.  To argue body counts is, at best, insensitive, and does nothing to convince the public of our ability to properly manage nuclear technology.

>

> Chernobyl was a human and technological disaster.  Let's accept that, learn from it, and make sure we never even come close to a recurrence.

>

> The opinions expressed are strictly mine.

> It's not about dose, it's about trust.

> Let's look at the real problem, for a change.

>

> Bill Lipton

> liptonw@dteenergy.com

>

> maury wrote:

>

> > Also To:  Don Kosloff, John Fill, John Priest, Pat Milligan, and others

> >

> > It is really sad that this issue gets used in this manner. The essential

> > scheme is to portray your nation, your organization, and your 'clients'

> > as victims of this so-called terrible disaster. As victims, you receive

> > money from individuals, organizations, and nations all over the world.

> > The Chernobyl  accident took place in April 1986 -  nearly 16 years ago

> > (not nearly 15 as one news item "reported").

> >

> > Last spring, there was extensive discussion on this list (as well as

> > world-wide) arising from the 15th anniversary of Chernobyl. You will

> > find many excellent references and summaries in the Radsafe archives for

> > about one year ago. Our esteemed news media carried the usual claims of

> > 30,000 (yes, thirty thousand!) deaths due to Chernobyl. There were all

> > kinds of outlandish claims including some being made by UN organizations

> > exactly as you see today. In fact, I think either or both UNSCEAR and

> > IAEA protested to the Secretary General about the conflicting

> > inappropriate (and unsubstantiated) claims being made by other UN

> > agencies. Cherish your memories of the days when we all thought that the

> > BBC was the paragon of truth in reporting world news

> >

> > The scientific follow-up studies reported last year showed about 100

> > deaths and about 1,800 cases of thyroid cancer in youngsters. The number

> > of thyroid cancers should increase for a while until the more

> > susceptible age group has been born well after the accident. But the

> > Chernobyl Victim Industry continues alive and well!

> >

> > This treatment is all about money and we should expect to go through it

> > every spring for the next few decades - with elevated emphasis every 5

> > years. It is a pity that the news media are always so ready to gain

> > attention this way.

> > Cheers,

> > Maury Siskel       maury@webtexas.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/



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

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/