[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: "The Bell Tolls for LNT"
Good summary, and I wish I had said it as clearly as
--- "Stabin, Michael"
> Franz wrote:
> >Radiation Protection is in fact politics and not
> This is not how I normally express it. If we recall
> the history of our regulatory process, for many
> decades we were entirely guided by the same
> scientific and advisory bodies that we have now,
> namely the ICRP and NCRP, in limiting doses to
> workers and the public. When the time came to
> produce a uniform set of national regulations
> (because those wacky folks out in California decided
> to make up their own state regs), these regulations
> were and still are guided by scientific input where
> possible. Lauri Taylor truly lamented the idea that
> we would move away from a purely scientific basis to
> one in which political concerns would come into
> play, but it was inevitable, so the best scientific
> minds (namely the ICRP) guided the process.
> At that time, and still in this time, we are unsure
> of what is going on at low doses and dose rates, so
> we made a *policy* decision, which is pretty
> reasonable. As John says, this is not the way to do
> good science (send any article you wish to a good
> journal in which you made measurements between
> certain limits and then extrapolated beyond the
> bounds of the data to infer values in other regions,
> and it should be rejected), but it is necessary for
> policymaking. Of course as regulations and
> regulatory agencies have increased, there are more
> political issues in the mix, and some arguably bad,
> bad science at times, but overall things are
> basically working. I agree that ridiculous amounts
> of resources are sometimes expended chasing
> miniscule doses does not make for sound overall US
> public policy on health and safety.
> I have stated before and will state again that I
> disagree strongly with the assertions by some of
> political bias among members of the ICRP and other
> bodies. I am also sickened by the abuse of the LNT
> by political opportunists, projecting thousands of
> cancer deaths across big populations from many
> people receiving low doses, scaring people for no
> good reason, including recent examples in the
> medical literature.
> We are all trying honestly to sort out what is true
> at low levels, between evidence for hormesis,
> thresholds, gene damage and repair, bystander
> effects and cellular signaling, etc. While we sort
> things out, the established policy is the one to
> rely upon. "The bell tolls" was not a very good
> critical assessment of the situation, in my opinion,
> just essentially an op-ed piece by someone who has
> staked out an opinion before all of the scientific
> data are in.
> Michael G. Stabin, PhD, CHP
> Assistant Professor of Radiology and Radiological
> Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences
> Vanderbilt University
> 1161 21st Avenue South
> Nashville, TN 37232-2675
> Phone (615) 343-0068
> Fax (615) 322-3764
> Pager (615) 835-5153
> e-mail email@example.com
> internet www.doseinfo-radar.com
"A devotee of Truth may not do anything in deference to convention. He must always hold himself open to correction, and whenever he discovers himself to be wrong he must confess it at all costs and atone for it."
Monhandas K. Gandhi, in "Autobiography"
John Jacobus, MS
Certified Health Physicist
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
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