Re: ALARA and "what is safe enough"

[Muckerheide <muckerheide@attbi.com>]

Of course this is the 'max exposed individual.' But just try to eliminate

all the baggage beyond that!



Then, when the max ind is orders of magnitude below any 'risk of harm,'

let's change the limits!?



Regards, Jim



> From: RuthWeiner@AOL.COM



> In a message dated 3/10/02 4:16:54 AM Mountain Standard Time,

> joseroze@NETVISION.NET.IL writes:

> 

>> If the risk of harm to the health of the most exposed individual is trivial,

>> then the total risk is trivial -

>> irrespective of how many people are exposed˛

> 

> what a great idea!  Actually, this is the governing principle for

> "environmental justice" -- if the environmental impact is not significant, it

> is not significant to any affected population.

> 

> However, if this were adopted, we can expect arguments over the definition of

> "trivial."

> 

> Ruth Weiner, Ph. D.

> ruthweiner@aol.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/