Re: Dr.Gofman--I just wonder..

["High Plains Drifter" <magna1@jps.net>]

Vince, your post on Gofman and Niagra Falls/Electromet is right on the

money.  It appears that Mr. Ricciuti has an agenda of some sort that is not

based on fact or science.



Dean Chaney, CHP



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

From: "Vincent King" <slavak@attbi.com>

To: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 9:32 PM

Subject: Re: Dr.Gofman--I just wonder..





> Radsafers-

>

> It should be rather easy to determine whether there is a problem or not

with

> buried material in the Niagra Falls area by simply looking at exposure

> pathways and sampling/measuring whether anything is there.  People are not

> at risk just because somebody buried something in the vicinity a long time

> ago.  They don't receive harmful exposures to radioactive materials

without

> the radioactive material going from point A (where it's buried) to point B

> (the exposed population).  If the hazardous materials aren't detectable in

> some pathway to the public, then how does the population

> receive a dose of any significance?  (Answer: they don't.)

>

> [Whether buried material should be 'remediated' (i.e., dug up and buried

> somewhere else) is a separate question that must be answered on a case by

> case basis.]

>

> And what is the mechanism for sub-background radiation doses to cause

> previously unknown health effects (e.g., heart disease) when low, medium,

> and high radiation doses do not cause these effects in any other

> populations?  (Living in the middle of the uranium mining area of the

> country, I'm somewhat familiar with the research on miners.  If heart

> disease was an effect of long term radiation exposure, it would not have

> gone unnoticed in that research.)

>

> I am outraged at the smirking hypocrisy of groups who would

> rather see resources wasted on their pet (anti-nuclear) cause - justifying

> it by their

> "concern" for the health and safety of the public - when in fact their

> efforts do nothing

> but divert resources that could be used to find and remedy real public

> health problems.

>

> I'm all for finding true causes of public health problems and solving

them,

> radiological or otherwise.  But anyone who continues to perpetuate their

pet

> "cause" by ignoring experts and scientifically based methods that can

easily

> identify (or exclude) a particular hazard as the problem is NOT interested

> in the health of the public.

>

> Vincent King

> Grand Junction, CO

>

> (P.S.  On the particular issue at hand, UCC-Electromet's ranking in

uranium

> processing is absolutely irrelevant if there is no pathway to exposure.

If

> there really is a pathway to exposures of any significance, then show me

the

> numbers to prove it (not a difficult task),

> otherwise it's a waste of time.  VK)

>

> ************************************************************************

> 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/

>



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

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/