Re: dose limits for members of the public

[AndrewsJP@AOL.COM]

In a message dated 2/12/2002 12:50:50 PM Eastern Standard Time, sandyfl@EARTHLINK.NET writes:



> I also don't agree that we can say that there is no harm to a  worker when they have received 5 rem for each year of their employment. There is no evidence to support that. 


The fallacy of this kind of argument is that if we set the limit at 5, then everybody will get 5. This is not the case in real life.  If we set the limit at 5, then maybe 10 people will get 5 and 1 or two may get more, but most will get below .2 (off the top of my head with no data to back it up) and many will get none.  If this is true or close to true, then why not set the limit at a much higher value, let the system work to keep everybody below that level as we now do and save the extra money to do real safety where lives are saved.


On the other hand, I don't have an argument for the litigation issue.


John Andrews

Knoxville, Tennessee