[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
The important question is health benefits of low level radiation,not LNT
Dear Colleagues, If we really are interested in health, as the title
of HPS suggests, we should have an open mind to both health benefits
and health risks. We are all in favor of reducing health risks. We
should also be in favor of taking advantage of health benefits of low
dose rate radiation. There is much better evidence for health
benefits than of health risks. See my article: "Longevity is the
most appropriate measure of health effects of radiation" to appear in
the October 2003 issue of Radiology. It is available at
http://www.medphysics.wisc.edu/~jrc/art_longevity.htm.
We will not know the truth about health effects at low dose
rates until we do a double blind human study, such as I propose in my
article:
" Is radiation an essential trace energy?" Physics and Society
October 2001 http://www.aps.org/units/fps/oct01/a5oct01.html
I wish to announce an alternate location for the Virtual
Radiation Museum (VRM) as the first wing in the SCIENCE MUSEUM (SM)
located at "http://www.sciencemuseum.us"; Please visit the VRM and
send me suggestions for appropriate additions to the VRM and
appropriate links for the Science Museum.
Best wishes, John Cameron
>Bill Lipton wrote: It's important to keep in mind that LNT is
>generally not presented as a "fact," simply as a prudent precaution
>for planning purposes, e.g. setting radiation protection standards.
>Thus, "proving" or "disproving" LNT, whatever that means, is largely
>irrelevant. What would be relevant is someone proving, "beyond a
>reasonable doubt," that there is a threshold for radiation effects.
>I don't see Cohen's study coming close to that.
--
John R. Cameron (jrcamero@wisc.edu)
E2571 Porter Rd. PO Box 405,
Lone Rock,WI 53556-0405
(608) 583-2160;
(until about Oct. 18 2003
Visit the Virtual Radiation Museum (VRM) at
http://www.medphysics.wisc.edu/~vrm
and my web page at http://www.medphysics.wisc.edu/~jrc/