RE: Al-Qaida may have nuclear weapons

["George J. Vargo" <vargo@physicist.net>]

All models are wrong, but some models are useful if one understands and

accepts their inherent limitations.  Yes, LNT has its many flaws, but unless

and until one is willing to accept individual designer dose limitations

based on gender, age, specific cancer, and other lifestyle modifiers (e.g.,

smoking), it's the best "one size fits none" solution that we have.

 

Glen is exactly on point.

 

 



George J. Vargo, Ph.D., CHP 

Senior Scientist 

MJW Corporation 

http://www.mjwcorp.com <http://www.mjwcorp.com/>  

610-925-3377 

610-925-5545 (fax) 

vargo@physicist.net 



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

From: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

[mailto:owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu] On Behalf Of Gv1@AOL.COM

Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 10:17 PM

To: jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET; sjd@swcp.com; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Subject: Re: Al-Qaida may have nuclear weapons





There is a distinct difference is using a simplified model to implement a

program for the sake of simplicity and consistency (LNT) and being able to

use more complex models to solve real problems.  LNT was an administrative

decision on how to do business in the future and real problem solving is

preventing the occurrence or recurrence of multivariate problems that others

place at our feet to solve.  The issue of WMD's is one of problem solving,

not providing administrative guidelines for terrorists to follow.  If they

would follow the rules, we could set up some simplified administrative

processes that would work (i.e. concentration, total content, etc.)

 

When it comes to setting simple programmatic thresholds, I think you should

use simple models that RP personnel and radworkers can understand and comply

with consistently.  Remember, nobody wants to spend money to have their

resources sit in RP training, so you have to use your brilliance to really

simplify your processes.  In this case you have the choice of how you wish

to implement your program.  The sign of a good HP is being able write a

procedure for a 7th grade audience level that meets all of the regulatory

requirements and levels of excellence (ALARA) you're looking for.

 

The LNT model is a simplistic model that is used implement risk calculation

and regulatory processes.  It is not designed to solve a problem.  Everyone

put their heads together and said, this probably isn't the most correct

model, but this is the one that is easy to implement and should probably

result in accurate or conservative risk estimates.  Solving problems

requires being able analyze whatever variables may be present and not just

assuming a linear model.  Thoroughly understanding and solving significant

problems rarely involve a single-point failure (linear model).  

 

I often times have to solve real problems that may require the understanding

of multiple variables.  In fact, you'll find that most significant incidents

had several contributing factors that led up to an event, not a single point

failure that is totally responsible.  Most programs have processes and

procedures capable of preventing the catostrophic single-point failures.  To

assume the linear approach might solve one facet of the problem, but you'll

have a repeat later because you didn't address the root of the issue.

 

In the end, if you set up programmatic models too complex to follow or your

view of complex problems is simplistic and you do not look deep enough, than

you have failed.  The tough part is to be perfect at both, all of the time.

Anything less is unacceptable.

 

Glen Vickers