Re: Dirty Bonbs & Radiophobia

[BLHamrick@AOL.COM]

In a message dated 10/28/2003 12:20:42 PM Pacific Standard Time, 

jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET writes:

To educate the public, one must overcome decades of strong antinuclear

indoctrination. I don't know if it would be possible. In any case, it would

certainly not be easy.

Here are the problems the professional community faces in educating the 

public, as I see them:



There are a reasonably small number of very, very vocal nuclear activists, 

whose livelihood and access to power depends on continued opposition to all 

things nuclear, irrespective of the facts.  



The techniques used by many of these activists include hyperbole, distortion, 

dire-sounding statements made without the proper context, and appeal to the 

base emotions of their audience (i.e., mostly fear).  The professionals, and 

particularly the government officials in regulatory agencies cannot, and (general

ly) do not want to, compete with these activists by using these techniques, 

because these techniques are inherently dishonest.



The facts of a situation, as presented by agency officials, or other 

professionals are generally boring, tedious, and complicated.  This is not a good 

recipe for engaging an audience.  In addition, once the damage has been done by 

certain activists that don't feel constrained by the truth, the whole truth and 

nothing but the truth, it is very, very difficult to recoup from that.



As my Evidence teacher, in law school, put it:  "Stand up and object at the 

first sign that the opposing attorney is going to ask something misleading.  If 

you wait, and the jury hears his question, it is like he has stabbed you with 

a hot knife (his simile was actually something more graphic) - the judge may 

rule that he has to remove the knife, but you will know it was there for the 

rest of the trial.  



Countering this situation is difficult, but it can be done.  Some of the more 

flamboyant activists use techniques reminescent of the snake-oil salesmen of 

yore, and should be quickly and routinely challenged on every single public 

mis-statement made, until their credibility is equal to the credibility of their 

cumulative mis-statements.  This will require a coordinated effort by 

professionals in all areas - government, academia and industy.



Change will also require a conduit to Congress and State Legislatures.  Get 

involved.  Join the Health Physics Society, the Society of Nuclear Medicine, 

the American Nuclear Society, or other professional organization, and volunteer 

for a committee.  If you work for a State radiation control program, find out 

from your program director if you can join the Conference of Radiation Control 

Program Directors, and volunteer on one of their committees.  There is no 

dearth of positions for volunteers in any of these organizations.



We can continue to "talk amongst ourselves" or we can find the means to reach 

out to the public and have our voice heard, but it will require a lot of work.



With that in mind, I remind you again that two very important rulemakings are 

in the works at the EPA and NRC, on clearance and disposal of 

residually-contaminated materials.  Contact me privately for details.



Barbara L. Hamrick, CHP, JD