Re: Natural background.

["William A. Fendt" <35346@strauss.udel.edu>]

I got the same impression after reading the article, i.e. that the 
public's fear of all things radioactive would be used to convince smokers 
to quit.  The warning can only reinforce those unsupported fears.  
Bill Fendt U of DE

On Wed, 17 Aug 1994 SIMPSOND@orau.gov wrote:

>           I have enjoyed the recent comments on the knowledge of our
>           congress in the areas of radiation, but I wonder if at times
>           we are "shooting ourselves in the foot".  I was recently
>           approached to write a reply to the August editorial in the
>           HP journal on radiation warnings on cigarettes.  My initial
>           reaction was that I had glanced at the article but had
>           assumed it was meant to be regarded as humorous.  In
>           rereading the item, I was surprised to realize that
>           apparently it was serious.
> 
>           While well-meaning, is the idea of associating all the ills
>           of cigarette smoking with radiation simply going to inflate
>           the fears of the public (and congress) about radiation?
>           While not an expert in the area, my understanding was that
>           the nicotine, tars, etc. in the cigarette were also known
>           cancer agents and to ignore their role would be poor
>           science.  Does anyone have more information on the subject
>           or have comments on the editorial?
> 
>           Dave Simpson
>           ORAU
>