Re[5]: unuseful dental x-ray

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

     Franz et al,
     
     The point I was trying to make was one of credibility (ours!) and 
     risks. I think we as a profession have a real credibility problem when 
     we (at least the majority of us) tell people that 5 or 10 mrem is not 
     harmful, and we (at least the majority of us) advocate a de minimus 
     value of 50 to 100 mrem per year as being "below regulatory concern."  
     At the same time we then talk about applying the ALARA concept to 5 
     mrem and even talk about it being an illegal x-ray! (I would not 
     expect any member of the public to trust a health physicist telling 
     them that low level radiation is not really dangerous while that same 
     HP refused a 5 mrem dental x-ray.) We can't have it both ways, 
     folks!!!
     
     Steven D. Rima, CHP
     Manager, Health Physics and Industrial Hygiene
     MACTEC-ERS, LLC
     steven.rima@doegjpo.com
     
     "The above opinions are mine, and I hereby claim them all!"


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Re[3]: unuseful dental x-ray
Author:  "Franz Schoenhofer" <schoenho@via.at> at Internet
Date:    10/28/97 4:28 PM


Schoenhofer
Habichergasse 31/7
A-1160 Wien
AUSTRIA
Tel./Fax: +43-1-4955308
Mobiltel.: +43-664-3380333
e-mail: schoenho@via.at
     
     <snip>
     
This is your personal view, which I respect and I assure you that I do not 
feel endangered by such an exposure myself. I have been last year on the 
atolls of Mururoa and Fangataufa - the sites of the French nuclear bomb 
tests and I did not feel a minute endangered. But there is a difference when 
you go from a personal exposure to the public with milliions of people. You 
are not in accordance with the opinion of international organisations and 
not even with national legislation. 
     
I hope the LNT discussion will not start again......
     
     <snip>
     
Franz