Re: potassium iodide

[Emil <kerremba@pilot.msu.edu>]

Radsafers,

Quote from:
 (draft) 1. NUREG/CR-6310, "An Analysis of Potassium Iodide (KI)
Prophylaxis for the General Public in the Event of a Nuclear Accident":

"3.
   3. The tort system in the U.S. is also quite unique and different
from other European countries. In the US, the implementation of a
protective action may entail litigation and liability for long after the
accident. The TMI accident is a case in point. One can expect that
administration of KI on a  mass basis would certainly entail litigation
in this country, whereas the government of Poland, which administered KI
on a mass-basis, did not appear to be faced with such litigation. In
fact, we are not even aware of any pending lawsuits against the former
Soviet Union government or plans by the government to compensate people
of other countries for the pain and suffering they might have
experienced as a result of Chernobyl." 

End of quote

As far as I know that lawsuits could not be apply to Chernobyl accident
because the 
accident was recognized in the international community as DISASTER and 
CATASTROPHE categore. 
Otherwise the Soviet Union should be liable for consiquenses of fall out
in European countries as it was coming procedure in international
relations in times of the above ground weapons testings.

Emil.
kerremba@pilot.msu.edu

It is still so nice to represent your own opinion and not your
employer's
when you do not have one.