----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 11:03
AM
Subject: RE: AARST Radon Scientist Claim
Nation's Policy a Failure
Does anyone besides me think that it would be a good idea for
the public to be told "the estimated lung cancer risk from radon is 18,600
deaths per year, but could range from 3,000 to 33,000 per
year?" Do we think the public is unable to grasp the idea
that the numbers are only calculations that involve some significant
uncertainties?
- - - - -
IMO, as usual, some segments of the public would be unable to
grasp the idea, while others would grasp it only too well -- people trying to
get a piece of the "remediation funding" pie would probably tend to use the
high figure in their (or their lawyers') arguments.
Similarly, estimates of this type - with very wide uncertainty
margins - are liable to be misused, when they are in some way connected with
nuclear power (Yucca mountain, SNF transports, NPP effluent releases,
etc.)
Jaro