Re: Demise of UNSCEAR? BENEFIT at low dose

[hflong@postoffice.pacbell.net]

Dear Jerry, John and Radsafe,

Increasing evidence of BENEFIT from 0.1-10 rads, acute or per year, suggests

that UNSCEAR policies injure, like depriving people of sunshine, fluoride,

iodine, NaCl,etc



Howard Long



"Jacobus, John (NIH/OD/ORS)" wrote:



> 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/



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

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/