|
Yeah,
and if you hold a pencil at shoulder height and let go of it a hundred million
times and it drops to the floor every time, you haven't proven that it will drop
the next time, but a) that's the way to bet, and b) most reasonable people would
consider that adequate proof that pencils drop to the floor when you release
them.
The
difference between the "Chicken Little" syndrome and reasonable people is
chicken little's always ask "what if" forever, while reasonable people reach a
point where they've seen enough proof to believe there are no more "what
ifs" that need to be asked.
Having
taken over 18 rem in one year without any evidence of harm, and having come out
of it healthier than I went in, I have no more what ifs to ask. I can say
5 rem per year does no harm, because my experience convinces me that the
statement is correct.
Les
Aldrich, CHP
-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Cohen [mailto:jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 10:45 AM To: BLHamrick@aol.com; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu Subject: Re: dose limits for members of the public What would constitute "evidence" of
"no harm" at any given dose level? If a hundred million persons received a 5.0
dose with no observed resultant harm. how could we be positively assured that if
that dose were given to just one more person, harm would not occur. You can't
prove a negative! Except in areas of radiation protection, most people are
already aware of that.
|