RE: COGEMA Says No to LNT

["Jacobus, John (OD/ORS)" <jacobusj@ors.od.nih.gov>]

Kai,

I am not sure what you mean by "the "megalomaniac on a mission from God" in

the HPS."  I do believe that the HPS position statement is a position

statement.  It has nothing to do with the violation of any law or

regulation.  Remember, there is still free speech, and the HPS is exercising

its option to make a statement.  I believe that their statement is valid.

With regard to COGEMA, I believe that the issue is whether or not they

violated a law or regulation, which is a little different.  



By the way, the whole quote from the HPS is 



"In accordance with current knowledge of radiation health risks, the Health

Physics Society

recommends against quantitative estimation of health risks below an

individual dose of 5 rem in

one year or a lifetime dose of 10 rem in addition to background radiation.

Risk estimation in this

dose range should be strictly qualitative accentuating a range of

hypothetical health outcomes

with an emphasis on the likely possibility of zero adverse health effects.

The current philosophy of

radiation protection is based on the assumption that any radiation dose, no

matter how small,

may result in human health effects, such as cancer and hereditary genetic

damage. There is

substantial and convincing scientific evidence for health risks at high

dose. Below 10 rem

(which includes occupational and environmental exposures), risks of health

effects are either too

small to be observed or are non-existent."



-- John 



-----Original Message-----

From: Kai Kaletsch [mailto:info@eic.nu]

Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 12:16 PM

To: William V Lipton; Jacobus, John (OD/ORS)

Cc: RadSafe

Subject: Re: COGEMA Says No to LNT





John and Bill:



Do you disagree with the position statement by the "megalomaniac on a

mission from God" in the HPS?:



( http://www.hps.org/documents/radiationrisk.pdf )



"In accordance with current knowledge of radiation health risks, the Health

Physics Society recommends against quantitative estimation of health risks

below an individual dose of 5 rem in one year ."



Isn't that what the report claims Cogema did? Is the HPS position statement

in violation of any US laws or regulations?

. . .

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

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/