Re: Nova - Dirty Bombs - Who is their expert - FYI

["J. J. Rozental" <joseroze@netvision.net.il>]

I am sorry for the last incomplete e-mail:



Dear John,

About you comment:



"My thought while reading this is that perhaps we should ignore the

radioactivity of the dirty bomb. I mean hide the reality of the

radioactivity from the general population!" The bomb can do local damage

and the radioactivity will do little real damage even over the lifetime

of the exposed individuals.



-- Certainly not! - What I wrote was: I do believe the response in case of

a Dirty Bomb wouldn’t be worst than the Goiania accident.

In other words: There is not a Dirty Bomb scenario to characterize a worst

danger than de Goiania's Accident.



About public I spent about 5 years in Goiania and  I can understand very

well public's trauma about radiation and ignorance,  and the  media polemic

anxiety



Jose Julio Rozental

joseroze@netvision.net.il

Israel













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

From: "John Andrews" <andrewsjp@chartertn.net>

To: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

Cc: "J. J. Rozental" <joseroze@netvision.net.il>

Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 5:05 AM

Subject: Re: Nova - Dirty Bombs - Who is their expert - FYI





J. J. Rozental wrote:



><snip>

>



>If you consider response  for developed countries like USA, that have

enough

>equipment and personal, material resources, economic resources, medical

>support and Waste Repository to transfer the waste generated, the technical

>response is not the more complex problem. If you consider developing

>countries or even those  with good level for technical response, the

>situation is completely different, taking into account the capacity of

each.

>Not only technical response was the main aspect of Goiania's radiological

>accident, but also the management of conflicts - social, psychological,

>political, economic, and misunderstanding problems had to be faced in

>Goiania. Of these, stigmatization and discrimination against the victims

and

>against the main products of the city (state).  -  No dear colleagues, it

is

>not only the technical response to deal with during an accident, but rather

>all the above mentioned conflicts present lessons that must be analyzed

to

>improve  safety culture and experience to be shared.

>

<snip>



>Jose de Julio Rozental

>

>

>

My thought while reading this is that perhaps we should ignore the

radioactivity of the dirty bomb. I mean hide the reality of the

radioactivity from the general population!  The bomb can do local damage

and the radioactivity will do little real damage even over the lifetime

of the exposed individuals.  If they are never told of the

radioactivity, then the psychological trauma will never occur.  What

would happen if we did not look for radioactivity or radiation?  What

would happen if we took our readings and called them all zero to the

press and the government controllers?  Would we all not be better off in

the long run.  The Soviet Union did this in Chelybinsk!  Of course that

was a MAJOR release.  But they did not tell anyone about it for what, 25

years!  Nor do most people in the US, or the world for that matter, know

anything about that event.  Perhaps this would be a better way to handle

the dirty bomb scenario.



Just a thought.



John Andrews

Knoxville, Tennessee







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

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/