Re: Radiation effects (toxicity)

[FRAMEP@ORAU.GOV]

Message authorized by:
/S=HWADE@aol.com/O=ORAUSMTP/PRMD=ESNET/ADMD= /C=US/ at X400PO


 



On June 9 that fine gentleman Wade Patterson wrote:

          It's worth pointing out that for setting radiation
          protection tandards conventional wisdom, however mistaken,
          mandates the use of the linear-no threshold THEORY.  In the
          real world, we have much evidence that this theory is
          wrong. Here are some citations that show this.(some are
          incomplete, but you can look them up) Each of these studies
          found that there was either a threshold or a protective
          effect from the radiation doses that were looked at.

           [10-12 were then cited]

          I have no wish to debate any of this,
          so I'll just end with a quotation.

"...it doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter
how smart you are -- if it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong."
- R.P. Feynman

Best wishes to all,
Wade Patterson    
*   *   *    *   *    *    *    *    *      *   *   *   *   *   *   *

    Such statements cannot be made without the expectation of debate.
    Alas, I am incapacitated for the next month so my two cents will
    have to wait until then.

    Paul Frame

    P.S.  Feynman's comment can just as easily be applied to the
          theory of hormesis or the threshold hypothesis.