Re[2]: Dose vs Regs cont'd

[sandy_perle@email.fpl.com]

I wouldn't suggest that "all" lawsuits filed regarding a radiation exposure can 
be classified as being frivolous or ridiculous. Yes, some are, but it just may 
be that many of them are with merit, and just because a jury deems it such that 
the radiation was not the causal factor doesn't make it so. If this were an 
issue with an obvious conclusion accepted by the majority of the scientific 
community, we wouldn't still be having this debate. A small step in changing the
way we do business would be fine. A 180 degree change is not.

Sandy Perle
Supervisor Health Physics
Florida Power and Light Company
Nuclear Division

(407) 694-4219 Office
(407) 694-3706 Fax

sandy_perle@email.fpl.com

HomePage: http://www.lookup.com/homepages/54398/home.html

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________

Surely you must be joking.  Here in my corner of the world, ridiculous law
suits are seen daily.  Rational professionals can not base their behavior
on the worry that someone may eventually sue.  To wit, several years ago,
an astrologer in town was awarded >1 million dollars when she claimed that
an x-ray CT scan robbed her of several intrapsychic powers, even though the
procedure was medically indicated.  I could name you a gizzillion more
suits that are equally outrageous.  These suits have become a daily part of
our lives.  While worrying about a suit may be adaptive and helpful, acting
on that basis alone is another matter.  Think about the ramifications of
what you are suggesting.  If the rest of society acted according to your
prescription for logic, what would be doable?