RE: [Know_Nukes] Mangano urges new studies of TMI health effects

["Sandy Perle" <sandyfl@earthlink.net>]

On 21 Aug 2004 at 13:34, Stabin, Michael wrote:



> The issue is always the independence of the reviewers and their

> expertise.



It's even more than that. The reviewers can be independent, but if 

they have the same general philosophy, in other words, a somewhat 

bias, the fact that there is this additional review does not make it 

all A-OK. I have reviewed articles for HP Journal, Radiation 

Protection and for conference proceedings. While I consider myself to 

be independent in thinking (can you believe that), I also am pro-

nuclear, and therefore, an anti can obviously consider me to be "non-

independent". 



I took a quick look at the website, and didn't spend enough time to 

evaluate how biased it is, or isn't. In the end, it all comes down to 

what one believe in. If you are pro-nuclear, you tend to see this 

site, as well as any other, as biased and inaccurate. If you are an 

anti, you see this site as being right on. No matter what we all say, 

we all have our own biases. We can not escape that. Heck, just read 

most of the posts on Radsafe!  :)



---------------------------------------------------------------- 

Sandy Perle

Senior Vice President, Technical Operations

Global Dosimetry Solutions, Inc.

3300 Hyland Avenue

Costa Mesa, CA 92626 



Tel: (714) 545-0100 / (800) 548-5100  Extension 2306

Fax:(714) 668-3149 



Global Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com/ 

Personal Website: http://sandy-travels.com/