Re: A LNT Experience !!NOT!!

[muckerheide <muckerheide@attbi.com>]

Wrong again.  Working from facts!



The issue IS whether LNT is used to achieve ignorant results, like this

"case-in-point."  I thought YOU  added the !!NOT!! to the subject above.

That's the fact we're working from.



Jim



> From: Paul lavely <lavelyp@uclink4.berkeley.edu>

> Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 17:23:54 -0700

> To: muckerheide <muckerheide@attbi.com>

> Cc: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

> Subject: Re: A LNT Experience !!NOT!!

> 

> J. Muckerheide wrote:

> 

>> Don't know the state, but it takes

>> little for the rad protectionists (a little 'push' by the film vendors?) to

>> pass it! Could have come to them through the Rad Control Program, or

>> "Advisory Council."

> 

> Can we PLEASE work from facts and not what could be. Postulating that

> a board could do this or that is not the issue. The issue is - Did

> THIS particular board make a ruling on the fast film to reduce dose

> and is that ruling binding?

> 

> 

> Paul lavely <lavelyp@uclink4.berkeley.edu>

> 

> -- 



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

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/