|
John,
Applying your reasoning to other societal situations,
we would not allow the use of peanuts, or any other foodstuff to which some
people are deathly allergic.
I am
not aware of any genetic makeups that predispose individuals to radiation risk,
independently of risks associated with the wide variety of other agents that
cause DNA damage. Regulating radiation with LNT will not protect those
individuals with DNA repair defects, since there are so many other DNA damaging
agents.
A
Risk-Free New Year sounds pretty dull, perhaps even
unhealthy.
Best
regards.
Jim
Dukelow
Pacific Northwest National
Laboratory
Richland, WA
These
comments are mine and have not been reviewed and/or approved by my management or
by the U.S. Department of Energy.
-----Original Message-----
From: John Johnson [mailto:idias@interchange.ubc.ca] Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2002 3:55 PM To: Jacobus, John (NIH/OD/ORS); 'Ted Rockwell'; BLHamrick@AOL.COM; jrcamero@facstaff.wisc.edu; Radsafe Cc: jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET Subject: Re: Not using LNT to calculate risk does not mean there is no risk. John and others.
I'm glad to see that there is some support on
Radsafe for the ICRP/NCRP LNT position. I would add an item to what you
wrote.
I've posted this on Radsafe in the past: i.e.,
there are different risks for people with different genetic makeups, and LNT is
intended to give adequate protection for ALL people.
A belated Merry Christmas and a Happy (Risk Free!)
New year
John
_______________________
John R Johnson, PhD |