[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Not using LNT to calculate risk does not mean there is no risk.



Ted,

I may have missed your point.  The recommendations of the NCRP are in Report

116, not Report 136.  If you look in Report 116, I do not think you will

find a reference to the LNT.  You do find references to ALARA, but that is

another issue.  In the Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations, ALARA is

considered, not the LNT.



Report 136 reviews the science behind the dose/dose reponse assumptions at

the low dose and low-dose rates.  The only recommendation that I found is

that "more research is needed."  What the science suggests is that the

effects follow that LNT, but there certainly may be other relationships.

Based on the studies and analyses considered in Report 136, the LNT appears

to fit the data.  



Again, this is separate from the regulations which should be based on risk

v. benefits.  When you try to control doses below 100 mrem/y (1 mSv/a), that

is where the problem lies.



Personally, I believe that the anti-nuclear forces misuse the LNT to try and

make the regulations more restrictive than they have to be.



-- John



John P. Jacobus, MS

Certified Health Physicist

e-mail:  jenday1@msn.com



The comments presented are mine and do not reflect the opinion of my

employer or spouse.

------------------------------------

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

From: Ted de Castro [mailto:tdc@xrayted.com]

Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 10:23 AM

To: Jacobus, John (NIH/OD/ORS)

Cc: 'Jerry Cohen'; 'Ted Rockwell'; BLHamrick@AOL.COM; John Cameron;

radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Subject: Re: Not using LNT to calculate risk does not mean there is no

risk.





John P. Jacobus wrote:



> I just do not think that the science surrounding low-dose and low-dose

rate effects is the > problem as much as the implementation of the science.



Strange comment in this context!



If the NCRP recommendations which you are so strongly defending are not

"implementations of the science" - then what are they?



If they are - then you are simply saying the same thing many of us are.

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

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/