Re: No doubt there were flaws in the nuclear NSWS, why rehash it?

["Jerry Cohen" <jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET>]

Ted,

    There's an old saying in engineering circles that if something looks

like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is reasonable to

assume that it is a duck. I wonder why the same kind of logic does not apply

in assessment of low-dose radiation effects.



Jerry





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

From: Ted Rockwell <tedrock@CPCUG.ORG>

To: John Cameron <jrcamero@facstaff.wisc.edu>

Cc: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 3:50 PM

Subject: RE: No doubt there were flaws in the nuclear NSWS, why rehash it?





> Isn't it interesting that the flaws and confounders always produce the

same

> result, whether with shipyard workers, radiologists, radon in the home,

> dwellers in high vs low background, etc.  Not to mention the same effect

> occurring with non-radiation challenges to organisms: chemicals,

pathogens,

> sunshine, exercise, trace element nutrients, etc.  Even the increase in

> asthma, apparently caused by people living and working in filtered air all

> the time, weakening the unchallenged immune system.

>

> "Live with high radiation and let the confounders protect you."

>

> Ted Rockwell

>





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

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/