Re: Elephants vs mice

[Al Tschaeche <antatnsu@pacbell.net>]

Dale E. Boyce wrote:
> 
> Boy I hate to wade in here (no pun intended Wade), but I can't resist the fun.

> 
> I have no problem in using LNT for setting protection standards.
>  (as long as we don't keep ratching beyond the domain of the model)

Since the domain of the model extends to zero/zero, it is highly
unlikely (I hope) that we would keep ratchiting beyond the domain of the
model.  But, if the EPA could do it, they would.
> 
> I don't have a problem with using LNT to establish probable cause
>  (if it is used correctly).

I do. Courts of law really should operate on what is real.  The
probability of causation tables are based on an hypothesis that clearly
is NOT a representation of reality.
> 
> But I do have a problem in using LNT to estimate how many people we are
> killing with small doses.

So do I. Since we clearly aren't killing millions because of background
radiation, it is folly to calculate nonsensical deaths to millions from
microrem over millenia.  That's what the HPS position paper is telling
us.
> 
> The basic point of fact that we need to keep our eye on is that when
> everything is added up, the use of radiation extends the average life
> expectancy by improving medical care, reducing pollution, and improved
> engineering safety.  Over-regulating it out of business and scaring the
> public of being exposed to any radiation will cause negative health
> effects.

And so it does.  Should we not be doing something to correct this
deplorable situation?

Al Tschaeche antatnsu@pacbell.net