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

RE: precautionary principle



George,



None of the examples you cite support your position (unless I misunderstand your 

position).  You wrote:



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.  



All of these are examples of outlawing things that are proven to be harmful or 

dangerous.  However, unlike tobacco and your other examples,

    **** LLR can not be shown to be harmful, and may be beneficial ****

Legislating down to 100 mrem/year has much more in common with an established 

state church, because we are passing laws on the basis of faith in the unseen.



-Gary Isenhower



From:           	"George J. Vargo" <vargo@physicist.net>

To:             	"'John Jacobus'" <crispy_bird@YAHOO.COM>, "'Jerry Cohen'" 

<jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET>, <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

Subject:        	RE: precautionary principle

Date sent:      	Sat, 16 Aug 2003 22:19:29 -0400

Send reply to:  	"George J. Vargo" <vargo@physicist.net>



> 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 contact your representatives about your concerns,

> since they can the laws you want.

> 

> I certainly believe that research should continue.  It

> is up to organizations like NCRP, BEIR, etc., to

> review the various results and try an present a

> reasonable view of what the data suggests.  As you

> pointed out in a previous post, in some cases we may

> not be able to know, at least, all of the aspects of

> low level radiation.  By we need to continue the

> search.  After all ". . a man's reach should exceed

> his grasp, Or what's a heaven for?"

> 

> --- Jerry Cohen <jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET> wrote:

> > John,

> >     Maybe you are correct. Scientists may be wasting

> > a lot of

> > time in laboratories, data analysis, technical

> > literature review,

> > and similar frivolities when they should be out

> > taking public 

> > opinion surveys to learn the way things really are. 

> > 

> >      BEIR uses this approach in seeking input from

> > public

> > interest group to determine of low-dose radiation

> > effects.    

> >                  Jerry

> > 

> > 

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

> > From: John Jacobus <crispy_bird@YAHOO.COM>

> > To: Jerry Cohen <jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET>; <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

> > Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 1:44 PM Subject: Re: precautionary

> > principle

> > 

> > 

> > > And who is S. Fred Singer?  Has he heard that

> > science

> > > does not work in a vacuum, but is also responsive

> > to

> > > the forces of society (the public) and politics?

> > >

> > > --- Jerry Cohen <jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET> wrote:

> > > > some words of wisdom from S. Fred Singer:

> > > >

> > > > "Public-health officials and media alike prefer

> > to

> > > > err on the side of

> > > > sounding the alarm when faced with ambiguous

> > risks,

> > > > but this "precautionary

> > > > principle" does more to protect them - ensuring

> > that

> > > > they get attention and

> > > > that they can't be accused of complacency in the

> > > > face of danger - than to

> > > > protect a vulnerable and bewildered public. What

> > the

> > > > public truly needs is

> > > > a responsible, balanced view of scientific

> > research.

> > > > If the public health

> > > > community continues to let out cries that are

> > not

> > > > rooted in scientific

> > > > principles, there may come a day when a real

> > crisis

> > > > arises and they find

> > > > that no one is listening."

> . . .

> 

> =====

> -- John

> John Jacobus, MS

> Certified Health Physicist

> e-mail:  crispy_bird@yahoo.com

> 

> __________________________________

> Do you Yahoo!?

> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

> http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

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

> ** 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/

> 





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

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/