Re: Linear Hypothesis IS the Cause of P -Reply

["John Moulder" <jmoulder@post.its.mcw.edu>]

> This is a lose - lose situation...for two reasons: 
>  
> 1. As you said, if we ALL agreed that there are NO effects below 
>     whatever value we chose, the public will cry, "Conspiracy"!!! 

Actually, it's worse than that, because the strongest statement that any large 
group of radiation experts is going to agree to is:

"There are no DETECTABLE effects below xxx dose"

To maintain that there are no effects below the detection threshold of the 
science is just as arbitrary as maintaining that there is a LNT relationship 
below the detection threshold.

> 2. If there is disagreement as we currently have, expert against 
> expert, the public will say, "SEE, there IS no consensus, and therefore 
> we must err on the side of safetly."

Even if WE agree on a "no detectable effect" threshold, there are still 
Sternglass et al, who will disagree.  And while you may think that 
Sternglass's opinions are irrelevant, to a court of law or a public service 
commission his credentials as an "radiation expert" are just as good as mine.


BTW:  I continue to believe that the LNT is a secondary issue.  The real issue 
is the regulatory/public demand that "risk" be reduced to numbers like 1 in 
10^5; this thinking REQUIRES that estimates of risk be made far below the 
detection threshold.


John Moulder (jmoulder@its.mcw.edu)