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

[Tom Mohaupt <tom.mohaupt@WRIGHT.EDU>]

The same goes for EPA's statement, radon "is" the second leading cause 

of lung cancer. To me, this is a lie. It implies knowledge that just 

isn't there.

If they said "radon may be the second leading cause of lungcancer" or 

"radon is assumed to be the second leading cause of lung cancer based on 

conservative assumptions" or "radon is suspected to be a low order lung 

carcinogen comparable to occupational exposures, second hand smoke, and 

pneumonia", I would not complain.

Tom

Steven Dapra wrote:



>Sept. 24

>

>	This is written to answer one of Bill Lipton's postings of the 24th

>(reproduced below).

>

>	Kjell Johansen wrote:

>

>	"Back in the early '90s, the EPA's NESHAPS analyses for regulating

>airborne radionuclides was published in the Federal Register.  The opening

>paragraphs made it clear that the analyses was based on LNT.  It was

>presented as being the truth.  There was no hint that it was merely a

>prudent approach to regulation."  

>

>	Bill wanted to know what Kjell's point was, and I wrote:

>

>	"My guess is that Kjell's point is that LNT was 'presented as being the

>truth,' despite the fact that LNT has not been proven to be true.  I would

>say that NESHAPS was being deceitful by presenting LNT as the truth,

>instead of stipulating that it was merely a prudent approach to regulation.

>

>	Bill Lipton wrote:

>

>	"While I welcome your opinions, I get very suspicious when one party

>claims that anyone who disagrees with his point of view is 'deceitful.'

>Perhaps, it would be useful to post what, exactly, about NESHAPS you

>consider 'deceitful.' "

>

>	Bill, if you will read the above-quoted portion of my posting your

>question will be answered.  To reiterate, it was "deceitful" of NESHAPS to

>present LNT as the truth instead of stipulating that it was merely a

>prudent approach to regulation.  To go further, it was "deceitful" of

>NESHAPS to present LNT as being true when LNT has not been proven to be true.

>

>	 To be deceitful means 'having a tendency or disposition to cause to

>accept as true or valid what is false or invalid.'  Synonyms are

>"deceptive," "misleading," or "dishonest."  (This definition is derived

>from Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary; 1974.)

>

>	LNT is not true.  You might choose to split hairs and say it isn't false

>either, and technically you might be correct.  The fact remains that LNT

>has not been proven true, therefore it was deceitful of NESHAPS to behave

>as though it is true.

>

>Steven Dapra

>sjd@swcp.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/

>

>  

>



-- 

Thomas Mohaupt, M.S., CHP

Radiation Safety Officer

Wright State University

937-775-2169

tom.mohaupt@wright.edu







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

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/