[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

AW: AW: "The Bell Tolls for LNT"







Franz Schoenhofer

PhD, MR iR

Habicherg. 31/7

A-1160 Vienna

AUSTRIA

phone -43-0699-1168-1319





> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----

> Von: AnaLog Services, Inc. [mailto:AnaLog@logwell.com]

> Gesendet: Montag, 25. Oktober 2004 00:53

> An: Franz Schönhofer; 'Maury Siskel'

> Cc: 'Carol Marcus'; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

> Betreff: Re: AW: "The Bell Tolls for LNT"

> 

> How can it make sense to defend LNT if it turns out to be wrong / bad

> science?

> 



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

Yes,  i f  it turns out..... The "battle" is not yet won.......



Until now it seems to me that everybody has been rather happy with the

limits derived from the LNT via risk-factors. Both for nuclear power

plant workers and the public there seems to be no problem to keep the

limits. So, where are the advocates for whome to allow for higher

limits? Where are they necessary???????



Any public health organisation as well as any occupational one is trying

to cut down exposure to toxic material well below the maximum

permissible limits. Why should this be different concerning radiation? 



I personally believe that a lot of the problems we face now concerning

radiation and radioactive material originated in the deliberate

agitation of former health physicists to dramatize and exaggerate the

impact of radiation. This gave them probably an outstanding position in

the community and a good income, but to us, who have to work with it

nowadays this is a really big drawback. Radon and radium in drinking

water is regarded as an extreme problem - but obviously nitrate or

pesticides are not. What is the difference?



I really believe that most problems we are facing nowadays in public

acceptance is derived from the totally wrong perception of "nuclear" as

being such an exceptional risk compared with other toxic substances.

Many radiation scientists have done a lot to implement this believe into

the public.





Best regards,



Franz























> Syd H. Levine

> AnaLog Services, Inc.

> Phone:  270-276-5671

> Telefax:  270-276-5588

> E-mail:  analog@logwell.com

> URL:  www.logwell.com

> 

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: "Franz Schönhofer" <franz.schoenhofer@CHELLO.AT>

> To: "'Maury Siskel'" <maurysis@ev1.net>

> Cc: "'Carol Marcus'" <csmarcus@ucla.edu>;

<radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

> Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 1:55 PM

> Subject: AW: AW: "The Bell Tolls for LNT"

> 

> 

> >

> >

> > Franz Schoenhofer

> > PhD, MR iR

> > Habicherg. 31/7

> > A-1160 Vienna

> > AUSTRIA

> > phone -43-0699-1168-1319

> >

> > Dear Maury, dear collegues,

> >

> > Thanks for the clarification. I received the text of the paper from

a

> > RADSAFEr and after having had a not too short glance at it, the

content

> > is without doubt to be taken more serious than the title.

> > As a former legislator I still defend, and will do so in the future,

the

> > LNT, because it is the only justifiable approach to legislationally

> > fixed maximum permissible levels. This does not only apply to

> > radioactivity, but to all other toxicological elements or compounds.

> >

> > Best regards,

> >

> > Franz

> >

> > ----------------------------------------------------------------

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----

> > > Von: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu [mailto:owner-

> > > radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu] Im Auftrag von Maury Siskel

> > > Gesendet: Sonntag, 24. Oktober 2004 18:53

> > > An: Franz Schönhofer

> > > Cc: 'Carol Marcus'; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

> > > Betreff: Re: AW: "The Bell Tolls for LNT"

> > >

> > > Franz,

> > > The journal , Operational Radiation Safety, is a peer-reviewed

> > > publication of the Health Physics Society. The headline certainly

is

> > > taken seriously because of the expanding mountain of evidence

> > > supporting the conclusion that LNT is untenable as a scientific

> > > hypothesis and as a cost effective regulatory tool. This dog is

beyond

> > > bothering the postman -- he is yanking on the alarm bell rope

loudly.

> > > Cheers,

> > > Maury Siskel        maurysis@ev1.net

> > >

> > > ==================

> > > Franz Schönhofer wrote:

> > >

> > > >Franz Schoenhofer

> > > >PhD, MR iR

> > > >Habicherg. 31/7

> > > >A-1160 Vienna

> > > >AUSTRIA

> > > >phone -43-0699-1168-1319

> > > >

> > > >Carol,

> > > >

> > > >What is "delightful"? That the article reflects your own opinion?

> > > >

> > > >I do not know the "Operational Radiation Safety" journal, nor

have I

> > > access to it. Therefore I cannot enjoy it. I think that the

majority

> > of

> > > RADSAFErs face the same problem.

> > > >

> > > >"The bell tolls for LNT" does not seem to me to be a headline

from a

> > > >radiation protection journal to be taken seriously. It sounds for

me

> > to

> > > be in the category of "Dog bites postman".

> > > >

> > > >This seems to be just another occasion to caution scientists to

> > accept

> > > both enthusiastic pro and con articles in non-scientific journals.

> > > >

> > > >Best regards,

> > > >

> > > >Franz

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----

> > > >>Von: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu [mailto:owner-

> > > >>radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu] Im Auftrag von Carol Marcus

> > > >>Gesendet: Samstag, 23. Oktober 2004 18:21

> > > >>An: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

> > > >>Betreff: "The Bell Tolls for LNT"

> > > >>

> > > >>Oct. 23, 2004

> > > >>

> > > >>Hello Radsafers:

> > > >>

> > > >>Just read a delightful article by Don. J. Higson in the

November,

> > 2004

> > > >>issue of Operational Radiation Safety (pp. S47-S50).  It is

entitled

> > > >>

> > > >>

> > > >"The

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >>Bell Tolls for LNT".  Enjoy!

> > > >>

> > > >>Ciao, Carol

> > > >>

> > > >>Carol S. Marcus, Ph.D., M.D.

> > > >><csmarcus@ucla.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/

> > > >>

> > > >>

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>***********************************************************************

> > *

> > > >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/

> >

> >

> >

> >

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

> > 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/