Re: precautionary principle

[maury <maury@webtexas.com>]

PP=PPP



ALARA: Nuclear Regulatory Commission's definition of ALARA, which is maintaining



            exposures as far below the regulatory limits as practical with

consideration of

            economics, state of technology, and other societal and socioeconomic



            considerations. The devil lies in "... as practical with

consideration of ..."



Evidence: Frequently there are few intersections of scientific evidence and

legal evidence.



"If we could regulate society..." George, I hope this contingency has little

appeal to all.

            Such regulation had no place in the founding principles of the

nation.



Legislative miscarriage: A legislator who will give away everything he doesn't

own.



Decisions: "Ultimately, many of these decisions come down to value judgments

..." As

             said correctly by George Vargo.



Summary: The burden carried by all who are interested is to continue to seek and



            propose truth by whatever methods one believes -- to include at

least

            science, art, and religion. (And, of course, we all know that art

and religion do

            not count! <g>)



While always remembering that: PP=PPP; else life can become very dull.



Cheers,

Maury Siskel  maury@webtexas.com

_____________

Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it, for it is

seldom Final.

===========================

"George J. Vargo" wrote:



> John,

>

> You have found the kernel of reality that evades much of the discussion on

> this list.  At the very best, radiation protection standards will be

> science-informed public policy decisions (recall that oft-forgotten part of

> the definition of ALARA ...socioeconomic and other factors taken into

> account...").  If we could regulate society on the basis of purely

> scientific risk, we would outlaw tobacco, alcohol, gas-guzzling SUVs, and

> trans-fatty acids outright, establish mandatory physical fitness and a whole

> bunch of other things that would cause a societal revolt.  Ultimately, many

> of these decisions come down to value judgments, like it or not, and it's

> easy to put a high price on something when you don't have to pay the bill

> (at least directly).

>

> George J. Vargo, Ph.D., CHP

> Senior Scientist

> MJW Corporation

> http://www.mjwcorp.com

> 610-925-3377

> 610-925-5545 (fax)

> vargo@physicist.net

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

> [mailto:owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu] On Behalf Of John Jacobus

> Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2003 8:43 PM

> To: Jerry Cohen; John Jacobus; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

> Subject: Re: precautionary principle

>

> Jerry,

> You probably misunderstood my comments.  Apparenty

> this individual has never had to deal with the many

> faceted aspects of scienctific research.  There are

> many groups that believe they are know what is best

> for society, be they scientist, environments, pro-LNt, anti-LNT, etc.

> Scientific principles work well in the laboratory, but in the society,

> scientific "truth" have to compete with the viewpoints of others.  As I have

> said before, the laws are what govern our regulations.  You should certainly



---  snipped  -----------------



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

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/