Implicit Assumptions in the Cassini and Other Threads

[gerald_falo_at_chppm7__apgea@chppm-ccmail.apgea.army.mil]

     Dear RADSAFERS,
     
     Implicit in these discussions are assumptions about the effects of low 
     level radiation.
     
     Now, forgive me if I'm beating an old dead horse.  How does one 
     respond to Gofman, Sternglass, Gould, Morgan and others?  I know that 
     each of them have different rationales for their views, but they can't 
     be dismissed as cranks.  For example, I find Gofman's credentials 
     impressive.....I know that credentials are not a guarantee of 
     credibility.  At the moment, I'm looking at a 1990 Gofamn publication, 
     "Radiation Induced Cancer from Low-Dose Exposure". Just quoting august 
     bodies as proof against their agruments doesn't seem scientific to me.
     
     From a radiobilogical standpoint, I've heard the Petkau effect being 
     used as a basis for saying low dose/dose rate is more hazardous than 
     we think.  I've seen the Petkau paper from Health Physics published in 
     1972, but my radbio isn't good enough to say if his results can be 
     extrapolated to real effects.
     
     In short, I'm asking are there any good references that rebut the 
     claims of the *scientific* analysts that say that low level radiation 
     is more harmful than the rest of us think?  Has there been a 
     scientific and published debate concerning these issues? Or have these 
     people a personal/emotional issue that have caused them to take their 
     positions about the hazards of radiation?
     
     Jerry Falo
     gerald_falo@chppm-ccmail.apgea.army.mil
     
     All opinions expressed here are mine alone.......