Re: Ra, 25 mrem/y

[Dan Burnstein <npro1@ziplink.net>]

Lets leave out the natural risks and ask if the man-made risks are government
supported through subsidies or government tolerated through regulation.  Then we are
down to a more rational list where citizens would like to be educated and have a
voice in the process - not to mention a responsibility to preserve the environment
for later generations and for its own sake.

Neon John wrote:

> Dan Burnstein wrote:
> >
> > If I were to walk down a country road or through a city I would not like to
> > receive 25mr or 250uSv, roughly the equivalent of a chest xray, without (1)
> > knowing it was happening, and (2) accepting that risk and exposure for some
> > benefit.
> >
> > It maybe that I would be willing to undertake this burden for a benefit, but I
> > would rather do it as an informed consumer than otherwise.
> >
> > Dan B.
> > npro1@ziplink.net
> >
>
> OK.  As you walk down the road, tell me what other risks you've
> considered and given your express consent to being exposed to.  How
> many of the following might you have even thought about before I
> listed them:
>
> Overhead electrical wires (risk of electrocution, not EMF)
> Underground electrical wires
> Underground gas line
> unknown toxic chemicals on the roadside
> booby traps
> vicious animals
> poisonous snakes
> poisonous insects
> lethal disease bearing insects (lyme, yellow fever, malaria, etc)
> escapees from the criminal loony bin
> mugger
> robber
> drunk drivers
> sleepy drivers
> random bullet falling from the sky (kills a person or two every year
> during the holidays)
> a plane crashing on top of you
> an errant military missile hitting you
> a wall crashing down
> objects dropped from windows above
> building exploding
> etc.
>
> All the above kill people every year and thus the risk is many order
> of magnitude greater than any environmental radiation exposure
> you're likely to encounter, absent finding an errant source.  That
> is true even if you accept the LNT fiction as fact.  Walk us through
> your decision tree where you considered and explicitly accepted each
> of the risks I enumerated above before you took your walk.  I submit
> that if you regarded each of the above risks, accepted them and then
> complain about the risk of environmental radiation exposure, you're
> not competent to evaluate the relative risk.
>
> This twisted mutilation of the libertarian philosophy that says that
> every individual is an island unto himself is disgusting,
> particularly to a libertarian such as myself.  When Adam walked in
> the Garden, that was a viable philosophy.  But when Eve was created,
> the risk of living became a shared one.
>
> --
> John De Armond
> johngdSPAMNOT@bellsouth.net
> http://neonjohn.4mg.com
> ************************************************************************
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html

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