Re: more st lucie workers expsoed

["George Gunter" <gunterg@NBNET.NB.CA>]

Yes, and we're doing it to ourselves again by insisting that high level waste be placed in deep burial facilities when managed storage above ground at plant sites is a perfectly acceptable solution.

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

From: Jerry Cohen

To: RuthWeiner@AOL.COM ; radiation@cox.net ; ncohen12@comcast.net ; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2002 8:50 PM

Subject: Re: more st lucie workers expsoed

Why? Because the idea that ANY amount of radiation is harmful is well embedded in our folklore. This idea is even reflected in our ALARA policies and regulations. The anti-nukes, and media people didn't invent the idea. It was invented by the ICRP, and codified by the NRC. In the immortal words of Pogo, "We have met the enemy and he is us". Since any amount of radiation is considered too much, the actual quantity is irrelevant, especially to an innumerate society. 

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

From: RuthWeiner@AOL.COM

To: radiation@cox.net ; ncohen12@comcast.net ; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2002 2:06 PM

Subject: Re: more st lucie workers expsoed

I

http://www.tcpalm.com/tcp/trib_local_news/article/0,1651,TCP_1107_1482702,00
.html

Can someone explain to me why external occupational exposure to 20 to 25 mrem and internal occupational exposure to 1 to 2 mrem are news?

Ruth Weiner, Ph. D.
ruthweiner@aol.com