RE: One last comment on Irradiation -Reply

[Schoenhofer <schoenho@via.at>]

At 16:52 02.01.1997 -0600, you wrote:
>Patricia Wieland called attention to one of the ICRP's more controversial
recomendations, i.e
>that 'A practice that entails or that could entail exposure to radiation
should only be adopted it
>it yields sufficient benefit to exposed individuals or to society to
outweigh the radiation
>detriment it causes or could cause.'  Superficially, this sounds
reasonable, but as a basis for
>action, especially government action, it is seriously flawed.  The problems
result from the lack
>of a "significance" limitation.  Critical facts are:
>
>1.  Every human action or inaction involves radiation exposure.
>2.  Rarely does any human action entail enough radiation exposure to
contribute to  the overall
>risk.
>3.  Few, if any, governments ever exercised the implied level of control
over the activities of its
>citizens.
>4.  Few populations would tolerate a government that required approval of
every new practice.
>
>Would you care to live where the government required a proof of benefit to
society from every
>new dance, hair style, card game, etc. because these practices entail
pico-rem or greater (or
>even smaller) doses?  This sort of thing is made especially onerous by the
recommendation's
>lack of an exemption for the normal cases where the alternatives would
entail essentially the
>same, or even larger, doses.   
>
>We need to introduce a measure of rationality into our "guidance" and I
would like to see it
>done before someone initiates legal action because some organization has
failed to follow
>such guidance.
>
>-----------------------------------------------#

Patricia has pointed out correctly a recommendation of the ICRP. You made
out of it a mandatory request, which is not correct and has to be refused.
Introduce your measure of rationality on a national level if you like, but
stop accusing the IAEA or any international body of imposing any mandatory
regulatons on you. They give recommendations and it is up to any government
or regulatory body to follow it or not. If you do not like your US
regulations, please blame it to your government but not to the ICRP, the
IAEA or any other international body.

I wish a prosperous New Year to all my Radsafe Collegues - I wish for myself
a lot of controversy discussions, an exchange of opinions, maybe even
flames, but always keep in mind that I never intend to embarrass anybody and
that my sharp comments never are intended to hurt anybody! From the many
replies to me I draw the conclusion that my intention is well understood.

Franz
Schoenhofer
Habichergasse 31/7
A-1160 WIEN
AUSTRIA/EUROPE
Tel./Fax:	+43-1-4955308
Tel.:		+43-664-3380333
e-mail:		schoenho@via.at