Re[2]: Low Doses, Ethics and LNT -Reply

[Steven.Rima@DOEGJPO.COM (Steven Rima)]

     David,
     
     Good question. I may be way off base here, but I don't think so. Is 
     there an established, worldwide, anti-airline network of organizations 
     whose stated intent is to shut down the commercial airline business? 
     Of course, the answer is NO. I think that's the major difference 
     between the nuclear industry and most others, not just the airline 
     industry.
     
     For many years, the public has been bombarded with a very effective 
     campaign by many organizations whose sole intent has been to spread 
     anti-nuclear rhetoric and scare the public. This has clearly worked 
     quite well. We are trying to counter this without much luck.
     
     One other factor: Ask any person whether they, individually, "need" 
     nuclear generated electricity, and I'll bet that their answer is no. 
     Ask that same person whether they ever anticipate "needing" to fly on 
     a commercial airliner, and I'll bet that most will answer yes. People 
     seem willing to take more risk (whether that risk is perceived or real 
     doesn't really matter in this discussion, does it?  ;-)  to get 
     something they "need" than for something they don't think they "need." 
     For example, automobiles kill about 50,000 people every year, but most 
     people still drive because they "need" to, and also because as has 
     been discussed earlier, they perceive risk quite differently if they 
     think they can control it.
     
     We can discuss this type of issue among ourselves, but can we easily 
     solve it? I don't believe so. Have you ever had a discussion with 
     someone who was anti-nuclear, because radiation is "harmful," while 
     they were smoking a cigarette? I have, and it's really frustating. I 
     tried to use reason and facts, while this person used emotion and 
     inauccuracies.
     
     Steven D. Rima, CHP
     Manager, Health Physics and Industrial Hygiene
     MACTEC-ERS
     steven.rima@doegjpo.com


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Low Doses, Ethics and LNT -Reply
Author:  "David W. Lee" <lee_david_w@lanl.gov> at Internet
Date:    8/13/97 10:58 AM


        Sandy's and Ron's recent postings prompted me to propose the following
for
discussion.
     
        Who is a bigger KILLER--the airline industry or the nuclear industry?
     
        What do we as RADSAFERS conclude that the Airline Industry is doing
"right" that the Nuclear Industry seemingly is doing "wrong" from the 
standpoint of maintaining the trust and confidence of John & Jane Doe? 
After all, the airline industry, on an annual basis, routinely ends up 
killing far greater numbers of people than the nuclear industry ever 
thought about doing.  Yet, even though the airline investigation boards 
only seem to come up with corrections AFTER a given airline accident has 
occurred, such "response after the fact" still seems to somehow maintain 
the trust/confidence of the public.  Even we RADSAFERS presumably do not 
curtail our taking airline flights subsequent to major airline crashes!  In 
comparison, it seems that no matter how proactive the nuclear industry is 
in terms of retrofitting and replacing/updating safety systems with the 
latest in technology, we still cannot seem to obtain the trust/confidence 
of the public.
     
Best regards  David
     
     
     
<snip>