Re[2]: textbook correct?

[azapantis@mgdestmx01.erin.gov.au]

>Radiation is known by everyone to be harmful.   What you are postulating
>is that small doses for some reason cease to be harmful.   But it would
>follow from your argument that if all the effort put in to 
>establishing a safe threshold has failed,  then surely such a
>threshold does not exist?

Ahh, No. I disagree with your logic.
The problem is not that a threshold has not been detected at low doses. In fact,
one could interpret the lowest dose at which the effect has been demonstrated to
be the threshold (however, I wouldn't recommend it). The problem is that the
effect has not been demonstrated at low doses.

This means one of two things;

1. there is no effect at low doses

2. we haven't looked hard enough to find it

Given the mountain of work that has been done and the continent of work that
would be required to demonstrate the existence (or otherwise) of the effect at
low doses, the effect must not be significant, all things considered, or we
would have seen it by now.

Compare with the power line debate. If there was a significant risk associated
with living near power lines, the studies done would not diverge so markedly in
their conclusions!

Regards from down under

Alex Zapantis                                  
Environmental Radiation Officer     
Office of the Supervising Scientist		
40 Blackall Street 														
Barton ACT 2600 AUSTRALIA 
            
Email: azapantis@dest.gov.au
Fax : (int+) 61 6 274 1519
Phone: (int+) 61 6 274 1642

The Office of the Supervising Scientist is a Branch of the 
         Federal Environment Protection Group