Re[2]: "Overthrow The Radonistas"

["Gerald Falo"<gerald_falo_at_chppm7__apgea@chppm-ccmail.apgea.army.mil>]

     Al,
     
     I agree with most of the substance of your reply.  My intent in my 
     original posting was to point out that the background and ideolgy of 
     someone might influence what they say.  This applies to everyone and 
     includes many issues including scientific ones.
     
     The question, "Is BEIR VI valid?" meaning "Are the results true within 
     the uncertinties?" certainly seems like a scientific question to me.  
     Your repsonse about extrapolating being guesswork (or politics) and no 
     low dose data certainly sound like scientific responses to my 
     question.
     
     I, myself, think that the relation between radon in the home and lung 
     cancer is tenuous at best.  As far as carefully perusing the BEIR 
     reports, I've not yet received my copy of BEIR VI, but I suspect that 
     it will be as boring and dry as the rest of the BEIR Reports.  I'm 
     trying to follow this debate as well as the LNT.  I am amazed at the 
     time and thought people have put into this and appreciate it.
     
     As far as extrapolation being guesswork, it seems to me that a lot of 
     health physics is guesswork too.  For example, going from gray to 
     sievert (rad to rem for all those using conventional units :-)) 
     involves the use of radiation weighting factors that are give to us 
     from on high. This smacks very much of magic.  As far as I can see, 
     there is little science left to do in health physics.
     
     "We must stop kowtowing to the politicians and tell them we don't 
     know. Then let the politicians do whatever they do.  We prostitute 
     ourselves otherwise. (opinion)"  I agree completely with this. I also 
     agree that if scientist don't know the answer they should say so. 
     However, politics often demands a response for good or ill.
     
     Also, a note about language: the original posting referred to 
     "Overthrow The Radonistas" - this is almost an ad hominem attack.  I 
     did not see the orignal print editorial.  I believe the insinuations 
     in phrases like this are unhelpful at best and hurtful at worst.
     
     
     Jerry Falo
     jer3ry@aol.com