Re: Exposure Benefits

[tdc@ehssun.lbl.gov]

>f) Considering the above condition, this will be possible since the new
>conception of justification is:

>"No practice or source within a practice should be authorized unless the
>practice produces sufficient benefit to the exposed individuals (not is
>the case) or to society (this is the case) to offset the radiation harm
>that it might cause; that is: unless the practice is justified, taking
>into account social, economic and other RELEVANT FACTORS.  Ref. (ICRP 60,
>S(18) page 71, BSS (220), PAGE 22)

I would not be so quick to jump to this conclusion.  I have not yet seen
ALL the data presented here!

I see several RAD SAFERS doing EXACTLY the same as we see many anti-nukes
doing;  Jumping to conclusions by not adequately weighing the probabilties!

Just as they assert that ANY radiation exposure leads to cancer death the
messages I have seen here assert that ANY air travel without this invasive
security leads to hijacking and death by explosion.

Look at the probabilities!

I'd suspect the probability of hijacking to be low and that of death or
injury by ANY means lower and by explosion much lower.  It would NOT
suprise me if it were on par with the cancer risk from 3 microREM as
suggested by LNT.

FREEDOM comes at a price - and historically that price has always been paid
in the same currency!  - but that is a political aside!

Ted de Castro
tdc@ehssun.lbl.gov
University of California Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
Bldg 90 Rm 0026B
Berkeley, CA 94720
(510) 486-5256
(510) 486-6939 - FAX

The preceeding message was NOT reviewed by my employer and therefore
represents MY OPINION ONLY and does not in any way represent the policies
or opinions of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) or the
U.S. Department of Energy.