Re: Radiation Panel Makeup Protested

[antatnsu@pacbell.net]

Elizabeth Algutifan wrote:

> So what is everyone so upset about? I know - it's
> nuclear energy, period.
>

Yes, among other things.  To me, the dichotomy is between those who fear being wrong
and those being willing to take a risk of being wrong.  The former are, to me, the
ICRP, NCRP, regulators and everyone who continues to reduce doses to extremely low
levels in response to the ALARA and collective dose principles.  They have expressed
that fear to me in numerous ways, both face to face and in refereed journals and
other publications.  Their fear is:  what if we let there be a threshold and then we
find out it's wrong.  We want irrefutable proof of the threshold and its value
before we are willing to give up the LNTH.

The risk takers are willing to look at all the data now available and say: we are
willing to establish a threshold (at some value which is a discussion for another
day) and see if that provides appropriate protection.  When we have good evidence
that the threshold is too high, we will lower it, if, in so doing, we don't cause
harm (hormesis).

To me, at this point in time, the problem is not threshold or LNTH; it's what do we
do about hormesis and adaptive response?  If the dose response curve is U-shaped, if
there are particularly susceptible mini populations, if there are people who benefit
from small doses, what then?  How do we operate in such a milieu?  This is the
question I hope the BEIR VII committee addresses, when it looks at ALL the data.

Al Tschaeche antatnsu@pacbell.net
begin:          vcard
fn:             Al Tschaeche
n:              Tschaeche;Al
org:            Nuclear Standards Unlimited
email;internet: antatnsu@postoffice.pacbell.net
title:          CEO
x-mozilla-cpt:  ;0
x-mozilla-html: FALSE
version:        2.1
end:            vcard