[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Demise of UNSCEAR?
Jerry,
I assume you meant "radiation is not harmful at LOW dose levels." Our
knowledge is at high dose levels, e.g., therapy, Hiroshima and Nagasaki,
etc. The question is at what levels do you not worry about harmful effects?
At 50 Rem? 5 rem? 0.5 rem? 0.1 rem? Since our knowledge is limited at low
dose levels, at what point do you think we should be worried?
Personally, I do not have any reservations about ALARA. As someone pointed
out, it is part of a process of self-improvement. It make you think about
doing things differently, and maybe better..
-- John
John Jacobus, MS
Certified Health Physicist
3050 Traymore Lane
Bowie, MD 20715-2024
E-mail: jenday1@email.msn.com (H)
-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Cohen [mailto:jjcohen@prodigy.net]
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 12:52 PM
To: Jacobus, John (NIH/OD/ORS); 'RadSafe'
Subject: Re: Demise of UNSCEAR?
Perhaps ICRP did not explicitly state that "all radiation is harmful" , but
why in the world would they advocate ALARA unless they really believed it?
How about LNT? How about collective dose? Such policies would be absurd if
radiation were not harmful at all dose levels.
----- Original Message -----
From: Jacobus, John (NIH/OD/ORS) <jacobusj@ors.od.nih.gov>
To: 'Jerry Cohen' <jjcohen@prodigy.net>; 'RadSafe'
<radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 5:06 AM
Subject: RE: Demise of UNSCEAR?
> Jerry,
> I do not know where you get the idea that the ICRP, et. al., consider all
> radiation harmful. Where do you see that statement? Are you reading
> something into the literature that is not there, as the "opposition" does?
>
> I do agree that hormesis can be shown to exist, but should it be used to
> establish regulations?
>
> -- John
> John Jacobus, MS
> Certified Health Physicist
> 3050 Traymore Lane
> Bowie, MD 20715-2024
>
> E-mail: jenday1@email.msn.com (H)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jerry Cohen [mailto:jjcohen@prodigy.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 7:29 PM
> To: Jacobus, John (NIH/OD/ORS); 'RadSafe'
> Subject: Re: Demise of UNSCEAR?
>
>
> YES! Mainly in their discussions of low-dose effects, and particularly in
> their acknowledgement of the hormesis concept, as opposed to ICRP's
> essentially ignoring and generally stonewalling the subject. Granted
UNSCEAR
> does not embrace hormesis, but at least it is treated with some credence,
> and not summarily dismissed. I suppose the UN establishment cannot
tolerate
> any exception to the common belief that all radiation is harmful. Clearly
> the idea is politically incorrect.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jacobus, John (NIH/OD/ORS) <jacobusj@ors.od.nih.gov>
> To: 'RadSafe' <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 3:06 PM
> Subject: RE: Demise of UNSCEAR?
>
>
> > Have you seen any contradictions between the UNSCEAR reports and the
ICRP,
> > NCRP, etc?
> >
> > -- John
> > John Jacobus, MS
> > Certified Health Physicist
> > 3050 Traymore Lane
> > Bowie, MD 20715-2024
> >
> > E-mail: jenday1@email.msn.com (H)
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jerry Cohen [mailto:jjcohen@prodigy.net]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 5:55 PM
> > To: Jacobus, John (NIH/OD/ORS); 'RadSafe'
> > Subject: Re: Demise of UNSCEAR?
> >
> >
> > > UNSCEAR assembles experts who comb through and analyze the literature
on
> > > such topics as the health effects of the Chernobyl accident,
non-cancer
> > > mortality from ionizing radiation, and the risks associated with
> > > radiation-based medical procedures. Their work forms the core of the
> tomes
> > > the committee puts out every few years. The International Atomic
Energy
> > > Agency, the International Commission on Radiological Protection, and
> other
> > > international and national bodies use data from UNSCEAR in setting
> safety
> > > standards and making policies, says the committee's chair, Joyce
> > Lipsztein,
> > > a radiation protection scientist at Brazil's National Atomic Energy
> > > Commission. "UNSCEAR is not biased. It's just scientific, not
political.
> > > That's why it's so valuable."
> >
> > It may also explain why UNSCEAR is dying while ICRP, NCRP, etc. survive.
> > ************************************************************************
> > 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/
************************************************************************
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/