Re: NCRP bias?

[RuthWeiner@AOL.COM]

In a message dated 5/4/03 1:00:37 PM Mountain Daylight Time, jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET writes:


> So, what is so special about ionizing radiation that an NCRP, or for
>
> that matter an ICRP, UNSCEAR, NRC, or the multitude of other organizations
>
> dedicated to controlling radiation exposure are needed?



I think (and this is just my opinion) that ionizing radiation is considered "special" because

(1) the use of radioactive materials is relatively new, 

(2) the physiological effects of ionizing radiation are not well understood

(3) the atomic bomb was considered a qualitatively different weapon, deserving of its own special legilsation

(4) all of this happened at a time when public focus on "toxic substances" was escalating rather fast.


After all, we have an Atomic Energy Act, but we have no analogous aand comparable Fossil Fuel Energy Act , for example, and RCRA is not a comprehensive Chemical Usage and Protection Act.


I quite agree that this approach does mmore to enhance fear than to assuage it.


Ruth 

Ruth Weiner, Ph. D.

ruthweiner@aol.com