Re: Talking to the "public"

["Dale E. Boyce" <dale@radpro.uchicago.edu>]

Dave,

I have a slightly diferent read of Wade's post.  I am not sure of 
his intention of the post, but there is a distinction between
using models and talking science among scientists and communicating
with the public.  Invoking a model with the public may very well
be a switch that turns them off.  Most people just want to know
is it going to hurt me or my family, and the best answer to _that_
question is no you will not be harmed by exposure to this level of
radiation.  

Even if the linear model is correct, at sub environmental levels of 
exposure the best answer to the public question is "no".  I am
in no way suggesting that we lie to the public.  Instead, I am
suggesting that we are not hearing the correct question.  Much
of the public does not understand or trust statistics (liars, damn
liars, and statisticians).  If we say something may happen it becomes
probably will happen, and probably will happen to me.  After all
people play LOTTO.

BTW.  This is just a toss up and not a dearly held conviction,
although I do believe we need too find some way to allay public
fear.

Dale Boyce
dale@radpro.uchicago.edu