Re: another intentional P-32 misuse incident

[LIPTONW@detroitedison.com]

I appreciate your skepticism, but does it make any difference?  Even if the 
contaminations are self-inflicted, they are still "intentional misuse", with 
significant impacts on the licensees, in terms of both regulatory concerns
and 
litigation.  Pregnancy was a factor in the NIH and Washington State
University 
incidents, but not the MIT incident.  P-32 is a common factor in all of
these. 
 It seems to be a means of assuring that the incident is discovered and 
creates the maximum possible anxiety, since P-32 is easily detected, while 
minimizing the chance of any real injury, since the half life is short.   
 
The opinions expressed are strictly mine. 
It's not about dose, it's about trust. 
 
Bill Lipton 
liptonw@detroitedison.com 
 
You wrote: 
 
Not to be a skeptic, but I hope that the investigation also looks at the  
husband/wife team as to a possible source of the contamination. Very  
coincidental that many of these intentional contaminations involve pregnant  
females. A "movie for TV"  would suggest that there is a motive for
financial  
compensation for mental stress, due to the pregnancy and all.. The notice
says  
there was no internal contamination .. just on the ring dosimeters.  Guess I 
am  
the skpetic after all!