|
An open letter to Dan Burnstein
Dear Mr. Burnstein:
You made a very eloquent statement in your
posting to RadSafe about what you called the ". . .
polarized friend or foe mentality" of the nuclear industry. And
indeed there is much truth in what you say. A long time ago I came to a
similar conclusion about the polarization of the pro and anti nuclear
forces. I would suggest that in addition to the 5 items you cited, we need
three more: (6) open an honest dialog with those on the other side (7)
improve the quality of science education at all levels in our schools so that
our young people will be better equipped to interpret the claims made (8)
respond vigorously and rapidly to refute ad hominem attacks as well as to
outrageous and unscientific claims, irrespective of which side is making
them.
I would remind you, Mr. Burnstein, that
polarization involves two poles, and the industry is not solely to blame for
hyperbole and inaccuracy and wishful thinking; a good example on the opposite
side comes from those who discredited out of hand the recent Hanford thyroid
disease study (and in some cases trashed the independent scientists who did the
work) because it did not support their preestablished beliefs that the Hanford
radioidine releases were the cause of vastly increased numbers of thyroid
cancers as well as a lot of other ailments. Another example is the many
American doomed to needlessly suffer and die early because this country, for
whatever reasons but I would guess largely because of anti-nuclear pressure,
imports more than 99% of the medically used radionuclides. There is simply
no large reactor that is permitted to produce medically useful
radionuclides. And yet another -- we have spent many millions of $ in the
quest for the absolutely perfect waste disposal site, when the real question
should be: Is the site adequate and will the disposal achieve a higher level of
safety and economy than we now have? And so high level radioactive waste
disposal, which I daresay you will agree is a technological reality, languishes
to the detriment of the American people, not only monitarily but because the
wastes exist today in a less safe form than they would if we used the technology
at our disposal to contain and isolate them.
(Regarding radioactive waste, I reiterate what I
have said many times before: no one wants a solution to the problem of high
level nuclear waste disposal. The activists don't want a solution, for it
takes away their cause. The industry and regulators don't want a solution,
for it takes away their jobs. The media don't want a solution, for they
would lose a lot of good copy and sell fewer newspapers and lose audience
share. The politicians don't want a solution, for it likely would cost
them votes. The only ones who want a solution are the American public, and
nobody seems to give a hoot about them!!!.)
And so, to self professed sometime critic Mr. Burnstein, I, a
self professed health physicist who believes that the mission of our profession
is to protect people and the environment from the harmful effects of radiation
while at the same time promoting its use for the benefit of people, would be
delighted to work with you (or anyone else for that matter) to do what it takes
to open a genuine and honest dialogue between the two poles, and to get us back
on track steering a pragmatic middle course, to the overall betterment and
safety of the American public and, of course, those who work in the nuclear
industry. United in common cause and genuinely working together with self
interest put aside, critics and proponents can accomplish much.
Ron Kathren
|