[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Science and LNT
See 10 CFR 20.1003: "ALARA ... means making every REASONABLE effort to
maintain exposures to radiation as far below the dose limits in this part AS IS
PRACTICAL consistent with the purpose for which the licensed activity is
undertaken, taking into account the state of technology , the economics of
improvements in relation to state of technology, THE ECONOMICS OF IMPROVEMENTS
IN RELATION TO BENEFITS to the public health and safety, and other societal and
socioeconomic considerations, and and in relation to utilization of nuclear
energy and licensed materials in the public interest." [emphasis mine]
Exactly what would you want changed, here?
The opinions expressed are strictly mine.
It's not about dose, it's about trust.
Curies forever.
Bill Lipton
liptonw@dteenergy.com
Howard Long wrote:
> John,
> Please answer the crucial question.
> Why are radiation regulators allowed to neglect benefit, (2 way test) in
> risk analysis?
>
> Errors of omission are just as serious as errors of commisssion!
> It is time for HPs to lead changes in those "codified - exposure controls"!
>
> Howard Long
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Jacobus" <crispy_bird@yahoo.com>
> To: "Howard Long" <hflong@pacbell.net>; <niton@mchsi.com>;
> <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
> Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 7:29 AM
> Subject: Re: Science and LNT
>
> > Howard,
> > Unfortunately, regulations are not medicine. Issues
> > like exposure controls, EPA decommission, etc. are
> > codified.
> >
> > In medicine you have a wide latitude to make decisions
> > on whether or not to operate. You should be grateful
> > you do have to deal with interpretation of regulations
> > and periodic inspections. (When was the last time
> > inspections reviewed your records on how you treated
> > your patients?)
> >
> > --- Howard Long <hflong@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > > LNT is NOT "the best we can do today- unless that
> > > possibility [it disproven]
> > > were a virtual certainty".
> > >
> > > Do you have "virtual certainty" of safety when you
> > > drive your car?
> > >
> > > What is the harm from NOT driving your car, or of
> > > NOT having the now likely
> > > benefit of 10 X the usual background radiation (less
> > > cancer and better
> > > longevity)?
> > >
> > > Is it prudent to not operate on appendicitis because
> > > of the risk of surgery?
> > > Sometimes.
> > > Competent risk analysis requires the 2-tail test,
> > > weighing BENEFIT against
> > > harm and considering individual variation.
> > >
> > > . . .
> >
> > =====
> > "Self-criticism is the secret weapon of democracy, and candor and
> confession are good for the public soul."
> > Adlai Stevenson
> >
> > -- John
> > John Jacobus, MS
> > Certified Health Physicist
> > e-mail: crispy_bird@yahoo.com
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
> > http://shopping.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/