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

["NIXON, Grant (Kanata)" <GNIXON@MDS.Nordion.com>]

"I am not sure why some aspirin users are so eager to play the victim. Until your hypothesis is accepted as a consensus, I'll avoid taking aspirins and throw-out the baby with the bath water.  You are welcome to obtain as many aspirins as you want, as long as it's not from my medicine cabinet." - Anonymous

 

Seriously, it is not difficult to understand the LNT position if one indeed believes that "there is no safe level of radiation." Bill, I think that you subscribe to that belief as your working model until a better one, in your judgment, comes around. Others believe that "the dose makes the poison." Both positions have merit but only belief system rules the land as of late. The truth could also lie somewhere in the middle.

 

Best regards,

 

Grant



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

From: Hall, David A. [mailto:halld@NV.DOE.GOV]

Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 12:23 PM

To: 'Tom Mohaupt'; William V Lipton

Cc: BLHamrick@AOL.COM; michael.g.stabin@vanderbilt.edu; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

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





This example gets even better!

 

Since 1000 aspirin is dangerous, then if 1000 people take 1 aspirin someone will "get" the dangerous results (as in collective dose or 'person-rem').

 

or

 

If "I" take 1000 aspirin over say 3 years (one a day) then I too should expect the same dangerous results (as in chronic low dose versus acute high dose).

 

In all seriousness, LNT and ALARA and collective dose ARE being mis-applied in the regulatory arena to the detriment of the taxpayers that foot the bill for government inefficiency and private industry cost pass-alongs.  The "R" part of ALARA seems devoid of any common sense.  ALARA is beginning to look like ALAP (As Low As Possible) or ALAWCD (As Low As We Can Detect) or even ALAWCGSETPF (As Low As We Can Get Someone Else To Pay For).

 

My thoughts only

David Hall

 



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

From: Tom Mohaupt [mailto:tom.mohaupt@WRIGHT.EDU] 

Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 6:39 AM

To: William V Lipton

Cc: BLHamrick@AOL.COM; michael.g.stabin@vanderbilt.edu; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

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





Let's look at your example a little more realistically. Your physician says take an asprin. The consensus of LNT physicians says that taking 1000 asprins is dangerous to your health; therefore, the effect of one asprin could be dangerous. Your experience is that one asprin has always worked on the ailment for which you sought the physician. I would take the asprin as the physician prescribed.

Tom



William V Lipton wrote:





What you seem to be saying is that if one physician says that a pill will benefit me, while the consensus of physicians says that this pill will kill me, I should take the pill.  Not me, thank-you. 



The opinions expressed are strictly mine. 

It's not about dose, it's about trust. 

Curies forever. 



Bill Lipton 

liptonw@dteenergy.com <mailto:liptonw@dteenergy.com>  



BLHamrick@AOL.COM <mailto:BLHamrick@AOL.COM>  wrote: 



 In a message dated 9/23/2003 9:41:23 AM Pacific Standard Time, michael.g.stabin@vanderbilt.edu <mailto:michael.g.stabin@vanderbilt.edu>  writes: 



I think it is good policy to be prudent until we have the clear evidence or a unified and well confirmed model that eliminates this reasonable doubt.



And, I think if the consensus is that we do not know the effects in the low dose or low-dose rate region, and those effects could include benefits, then it is not accurate to say that assuming harm is prudent. Barbara





-- 



Thomas Mohaupt, M.S., CHP



Radiation Safety Officer



Wright State University



937-775-2169



tom.mohaupt@wright.edu <mailto:tom.mohaupt@wright.edu>