[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: "prudent precaution"



Bill,
    Please explain why you consider assumption of LNT to be a "prudent precaution". If  LNT is not a valid concept, it would seem that a lot of limited resources are needlessly squandered to protect against something that's not a hazard to begin with. How can that be considered prudent?
    Also, society simply does not have the resources to protect against all things that might be dangerous. (as per ICRP, NCRP, etc.),
 
----- Original Message -----
From: William V Lipton <liptonw@DTEENERGY.COM>
To: William Prestwich <prestwic@MCMAIL.CIS.MCMASTER.CA>
Cc: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 12:49 PM
Subject: Re: Scientific responsibility

> The NCRP, ICRP, ... are NOT claiming that LNT is a valid model.   All they say
> is that it should be used for planning purposes, in the absence of sufficient
> information  to disprove it.
>
> I don't see how these convoluted arguments that, at best, show an association
> (NOT cause/effect) inconsistent with the linear, no threshold (LNT) hypothesis
> are sufficient reason to abandon this prudent precaution.  Politically, they
> won't convince anyone outside of the small circle of "true believers."
>
> The opinions expressed are strictly mine.
> It's not about dose, it's about trust.
> Curies forever.
>
> Bill Lipton
>
liptonw@dteenergy.com
>
>
> William Prestwich wrote:
>
> > The proponent of any theory or hypothesis is responsible for showing how
> > that theory can reproduce observations, in the domain of science. It is
> > incumbent on the adherents of the LNT to construct a model based upon that
> > theory to quantitatively reproduce the observations made by Dr. Cohen. The
> > argument over whether the study is ecological or not is irrelevant within
> > the framework of science. The ecological nature can be introduced into the
> > model. This is the time honoured approach of science since Newton, and is,
> > I believe , Dr Cohen refers to as the approach of a theoretical physicist.
> > If a such a model cannot be constructed then ending the debate is
> > scientifically irresponsible.
> > Bill Prestwich
> >
> > ************************************************************************
> > 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/