Re: One day story

[Maury Siskel <maurysis@ev1.net>]

Unfortunately, the answer to Mike's question below can only be, no. 

Behavior is so driven by  learned frames of reference that responses to 

ionizing radiation are out of all proportion to the dangers of commonly 

encountered, harmless dosages. Behavior toward other much higher sources 

of injury and death are widely accepted as the routine cost of living. 

We are strange, magnificent animals whose gifts for symbol  (language) 

manipulation preclude internal consistency between verbal and other 

overt behavior. Kill, maim, destroy! But great jumpin' butterballs, 

spare no resources to ensure that we shall not be touched by 

irradiation; especially if it might be nuclear and man-made ... well, 

the organic, natural variety might not be too bad      <g>

Cheers,

Maury      maurysis@ev1.net

================

Michael Stabin wrote:



Saturday, December 04, 2004, Associated Press - HOUSTON - An explosion 

at a chemical plant Friday that could be heard 20 miles away caused a 

large fire and sent up massive clouds of smoke...



http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,140490,00.html



I ask you, in all seriousness, viewing the spectacular images of this 

scene, would this have been a one day story if it had instead involved 

any kind of nuclear facility? Tomorrow this will be forgotten, but will

be followed by a number of similar stories throughout 2005: tanker 

trucks, rail cars, facilities full of toxic chemicals will be involved 

in accidents. Entire communities will be evacuated, emergency  

responders will be adversely affected, there may be loss of life. Will 

any efforts comparable to those employed in nuclear-related industries 

to reduce and

optimize radiation dose be made to increase the safety of these industries?



No.



This is why, in my comments on the ICRP 2005 initiatives, I called an 

"ethical consideration" the extreme lengths that we go to in protecting 

humans, and now elements of the environment (as I call it, the "Dose to 

Bunnies and Bushes Initiative") from doses of radiation comparable to 

natural background levels. As much as we would all like more funding for

health physics studies, we have been chasing picoSv of dose to humans 

for too long, and now are going to chase picoSv of dose to bunnies and 

bushes, while society's resources could be spent instead on reducing 

REAL morbidity and mortality elsewhere? This is simply wrong, and I will 

not keep silent about it.





Mike



Michael G. Stabin, PhD, CHP

Assistant Professor of Radiology and Radiological Sciences

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     michael.g.stabin@vanderbilt.edu

internet   www.doseinfo-radar.com