|
Ed,
On
(1), Congress and their staffers are not knowledgeable about a lot of scientific
issues. Particularly if the testimony is from Cristy
Brinkley.
On
(2), it is had to develop an objection if you only see the report when it
is presented for the first time. By then, the media has run with it.
By the time a response can be developed, the public has accepted the findings
and moved onto other issues, like the movies opening this
week.
-- John
John P.
Jacobus, MS
Certified Health Physicist
e-mail: jenday1@msn.com
The
comments are mine and do not reflect the opinion of my employer or
spouse.
I told a client that I had no confidence in the
FAS calculations in:
because they did not reveal the exact model used
(presumably one of the Gaussian smokestack models, like the EPA's
CAP-88?) or the input values fed into it; only their
conclusions. His answer to me was: (1) it was presented to Congress with all
their staffers and no one objected, and (2) there had been no outcry of
objections from any of the "professional radiation groups", so it must be good
work. This second point hurt!! Someone with much more clout than I have
should write to FAS and request clarification, or suggest that their
article be submitted to a publication with a peer review
process. Just my
opinion!
Ed Battle
|