RE: If you do Science, use the Scientific Method!

["Ted Rockwell" <tedrock@starpower.net>]

MessageMike:



I don't know of any good data that show deleterious effects from LDR.

"By-stander effects" are not themselves deleterious; they are merely

evidence of the organism's healthy efforts to defend itself.  Extrapolation

from bomb survivors etc. is not convincing evidence.  These NCRP and other

reports themselves admit that there is no evidence of harm at low levels.

And they admit that "most populations exposed to LDR" do not show

deleterious effects and do show benefits.  If the very reports that are

trying to sell us LNT cannot produce a case for it, I don't think we should

be trying to do it for them.  And they are simply unwilling to look at the

data which show hormesis.  They won't fund research on it, they won't look

at the material they've been given.  And they rely only on the demonstrably

false argument that it is prudent to assume the worst.  That is not science.

It is transparently politics.



Ted Rockwell

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

  From: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

[mailto:owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu]On Behalf Of Stabin, Michael

  Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 9:05 AM

  To: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

  Subject: RE: If you do Science, use the Scientific Method!







  >That is why "disproving" the LNT is important.  It is being used in a

reckless manner, even by those who should know better.



  I agree that the LNT has been used recklessly, and that responsible

scientists who know better should point out when that is occurring. However,

I think that scientific and intellectual honesty is the most important

element in both our professional lives and our dealings with the public. I

believe that anyone who is honest with the data will admit that at this

point in time we don't know what is going on at low levels of dose. There is

evidence in some experiments and data sets of thresholds and perhaps

hormesis, but in others evidence of linearity, bystander effects, and other

effects at low levels that cannot be categorically refuted. Until we have a

unified and accepted understanding of low level effects, we should also not

recklessly claim that there are none.



  Mike





  Michael G. Stabin, PhD, CHP

  Assistant Professor of Radiology and Radiological Sciences

  Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences

  Vanderbilt University

  1161 21st Avenue South

  Nashville, TN 37232-2675

  Phone (615) 343-0068

  Fax   (615) 322-3764

  Pager (615) 835-5153

  e-mail     michael.g.stabin@vanderbilt.edu

  internet   www.doseinfo-radar.com