Radiation hormesis

[GACarlson@aol.com]

In a message dated 5/4/99 6:04:57 PM EST, 7pe@ornl.gov writes:

<< Why should the public take on any additional risk, no matter how trivial in
 some people's opinion, to assist the nuclear/defense industry in getting
 rid of their contaminated scrap?  The only measurable cost benefit is to
 industry, none to the public (unless there IS a hormetic effect). >>

Even IF there is a demonstrable hormetic effect, how does one assure that the 
"beneficial" dose from contaminated scrap metal plus nuclear power plants 
plus fossil-fuel power plants plus radwaste disposal facilities plus 
household radon plus doctors' offices plus dentists' offices plus high-flying 
airliners plus...plus...plus...is still "beneficial"?  

An exposure which ALONE might have a beneficial effect, might have a 
detrimental effect when combined with all other exposures.  Unless the 
proponents of radiation hormesis can assure that their proposed contribution 
to the recipient's total exposure still has a cumulative hormetic effect, 
hormesis should remain an interesting, but practically useless phenomena.

Glenn
GACarlson@aol.com
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html