Re: Re: population exposure

[BLHamrick@aol.com]

In a message dated 6/29/99, 2:36:18 PM, radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu writes:
<<Could someone explain to me why so much physicist effort, at 
least in the United States, is devoted to controlling occupational 
exposure to ionizing radiation while so little is directed toward 
reducing medical (including dental) exposure?  >>

Theoretically, that would be because the patient is receiving an individual 
benefit (better diagnosis, etc.) directly due to the radiation exposure, 
whereas the workers' benefits (salary, etc.) are only tangentially related to 
the exposure (that is there must be some exposure to keep the plant or 
whatever running, but there is no direct benefit due to the exposure in and 
of itself).

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