Re: Psychological Impact

[JMUCKERHEIDE@delphi.com]

Politically, it is true that "what the public knows", governs. That's ok. 

But when evidence can't be presented because of "what the public knows"; and
when we have to accept "what the public knows" that is dead wrong instead of
correcting it; that's wrong. (But a lot of money is being made on "what the
public knows" leading to little interest in correcting "what the public
knows". (If I hold a *plastic* gun to your head, and say "your money or your
life"; since its really plastic, you must have given me your money
"voluntarily"  :-) 

> J. J. Rozental wrote:
> 
> > Who among you fellows will live or  buy a car knowing they were made with
> > recycled material from power reactor? -- what is the family's felling on
> > this subject?
> 
> I would have no qualms about living in a house, driving a car every day,
> having a fence, etc. that was made of recycled material from a power
> reactor.  There are international standards developed or being developed
> that specify the amount of radioactive material that can be in such
> recycled material.   If those standards are followed, the doses to me,
> or to any member of the public, from such material would be negligable
> and certainly safe.
>  I
> > am not a psychologist, but technically I am involved with the sensitivity of
> > the population and an effective risk communication.
> 
> Therefore, you must know how to communicate with the public and to tell
> them that recycled material is safe.
> > 
> > RADSAFERS of   many countries,  how many among you, believe or not  in  near
> > future,  for opposite reception by the population  on  reuse of recycling
> > materials from nuclear power reactor into consumer goods, buildings,   motor
> > cars, bridges, etc?
> 
> If the communication is properly done, there should be no problem with
> having the population accept such recycled material.
> 
> Al Tschaeche xat@inel.gov

Thanks.

Regards, Jim Muckerheide
jmuckerheide@delphi.com