Re: NCRP bias?

["Sandy Perle" <sandyfl@EARTHLINK.NET>]

On 2 May 2003 at 10:47, Jerry Cohen wrote:



> On the other hand, NCRP is dependent

> on the acceptance of LNT to justify its very existence. If low-dose

> radiation were not considered harmful, or possibly even beneficial

> in nature, why would we need an NCRP and/or similar organizations?



This is of course true for our entire profession (includes 

government, private enterprise, consultants, etc.) Why stop with the 

NCRP? They're just want a piece of the pie as well.

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

Sandy Perle

Director, Technical

ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Service

ICN Plaza, 3300 Hyland Avenue

Costa Mesa, CA 92626



Tel:(714) 545-0100 / (800) 548-5100  Extension 2306

Fax:(714) 668-3149



E-Mail: sandyfl@earthlink.net

E-Mail: sperle@icnpharm.com



Personal Website: http://sandy-travels.com/

ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com/



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

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/