Risks and their avoidance

["Richard L. Hess" <lists@richardhess.com>]

There has been a lot of discussion of the relative merits of one risk over 

another on this list.



At the suggestion of one of the members of this list, I'm starting to read 

"Breaking the Vicious Circle: Toward Effective Risk Regulation" by Justice 

Stephen Breyer.



As I started to read this he shows the percentages of risk of death per 

100,000 (I think) population, and being hit by lightning is very low.



However, one of the things you learn early on are all of the procedures to 

protect yourself from being hit by lightning. If you're holding a metal 

umbrella on the top of a hill during an electrical storm, your odds 

certainly increase.



Of course, dying by an infrequent event is binary for the individual who 

dies. It's 1 or 0. There are no percentages. Percentages apply across the 

entire population. One of my goals in life is NOT to be a statistic nor to 

have my children be statistics.



Yes, we can certainly go too far in spending oodles of money to save little 

risk, but education on risk avoidance, research into risk avoidance, and 

low cost expenditures to "be safe" are all very helpful towards individuals 

who do not want to become one of the "rare" statistics.



Now, I am not sure that being cautious and conservative actually puts more 

of a risk of death by lightning (for example) onto others in the same way 

that having a burglar alarm decreases your chances of being burglarized at 

the expense of your neighbor who doesn't have the alarm.



So we can talk all we want to about overall statistics, but not becoming 

one of the statistics is based in education and common sense.



For example, I have smoke and heat detectors throughout my home. I have a 

carbon monoxide detector in my bedroom. I've spent less than $1000 on this, 

and it's that much because it's centrally wired (for the 

smoke/heat/intrusion/panic system).



And yes, prudence (who is that lady, anyway?) demanded that I run a 

canister radon test when I moved into my home here almost 20 years ago. I 

think it was $30. No appreciable risk. Oh, and I measure 14µR on a G-M 

counter as background. Now that is slightly over-the-top paranoia, but 

obtaining that type of instrumentation was my response to dirty bomb scares.



So, once we can measure the risk and have inexpensive sentinels watching 

out for us, ready to chirp or howl at the slightest provocation, our 

likelihood of becoming one of the statistics is reduced. Not eliminated. 

Reduced.



How can we get society to take responsibility on a personal level? In 

California we have a warning almost every where (I think it's Prop 65, 

Barbara?) that says "this business uses stuff that is known to the state of 

California as a carcinogen" or something equally scary. So, I mean this is 

on my parking garage at the office. What do I do? Not park? Walk to work 

and inhale the same stuff on the street? Puleeze!



Education is key--and that's a life-long process.



Cheers,



Richard







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

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/