Re: European Communities and Radiation Exposure of Flight

[Al Tschaeche <antatnsu@pacbell.net>]

Charles Willis wrote:
ers are open to debate but the basic principle seems
> well-founded; that is:
> 
>           Everything is radioactive and extending  regulatory control to
>           too many sources could have a severe economic impact.

It already does.  Where does one draw the line, if one must be drawn? 
If radiation protection people were really serious about radiation
protection, they would require ALL radiation sources, no matter the
origin, to be controlled so that the doses would be below whatever limit
is agreed on.  All I see is irrational control of some sources and no
control of others.  Accordingly, I don't think radiation protection
people are serious about radiation protection - and I mean all of them,
myself included.  We MUST either keep ALL doses below limits and apply
ALARA to everything, including NORM, NARM, technologically enhanced
radiation, natural and unnatural background, medical, etc., etc. or we
are irrational.  Of course, we might be more rational and establish a
threshold below which we don't care.  But, that's too simple.  I guess,
from my perspective, we are irrational.  Any responses?  Al Tschaeche
antatnsu@pacbell.net