Re: Response to Norman Cohen

[RuthWeiner@AOL.COM]

In a message dated 3/29/02 2:41:39 PM Mountain Standard Time, ncohen12@comcast.net writes:



> that I support nuclear
>
> medicine. 


If nuclear reactors are all shut down, how do you propose that medically used isotopes be made?


NIRS's "explanation" of their use of "Mobile Chernobyl" greatly distorts what would happen to a spent fuel cask in an accident.  They know it is a distortion.  Besides, even their scenario would not duplicate the Chernobyl accident because the latter involves fuel in the reactor, and cooled fuel that has been out of the reactor for at least several years is what is transported.  Certainly you believe them.  You want to.  And to the uninformed person, their  explanation might even make some sense.  A colleague of mine used to give a very convincing lecture about phlogiston, too.  Sure, if an organization distorts the facts sufficiently then they can justify any term they want.  This does answer my question:  NIRS does use the term, and justifies its use with a made-up, disingenuously  distorted scenario.  


For the record, I don't find your "humor" funny, though I may be alone in this.. 

Ruth Weiner, Ph. D.

ruthweiner@aol.com