Re[2]: Ra, 25 mrem/y

[steve.rima@DOEGJPO.COM (Steven Rima)]

     These types of arguments from health physicists always amaze me. We're 
     talking about a *theoretical maximum* annual increase in a person's 
     dose of 25 mrem here. With the average U.S. background of about 400 
     mrem/y, plus the variability in background, this is essentially zero. 
     However, there are always health physicists that espouse the view that 
     this "extra" 25 mrem/y is somehow harmful and should either be reduced 
     by spending incredible amounts of money or not be allowed at all 
     without consent. Give me a break!!!
     
     I would expect that any HP who truly believe this to never fly on an 
     airplane, live at sea level in a wood house, never travel to a higher 
     altitude, and especially to never receive any occupational exposure, 
     since that's the worst kind. :-) When we have HPs spreading this kind 
     of misinformation, we don't need the anti-nukes, we're our own worst 
     enemy.
     
     As for educating the public to let them make an informed decision 
     about radiation risk, it's pretty hopeless from my experience. I live 
     in Colorado, which probably has the highest average annual background 
     dose in the U.S., and it also happens to be one of the fastest growing 
     states in the U.S. A large number of people moving here are attuned to 
     environmental issues, including radiation. Try telling them that their 
     conscious decision to move here increased their annual radiation dose 
     far more than the few mrem they may theoretically receive from a 
     cleaned up Rocky Flats site (after we spend billions of $ to clean 
     it). It's irrelevant to them. They don't want to hear about natural 
     background, no matter what the number is, but it's okay to spend 
     billions to reduce a few mrem to a few less mrem.
     
     When we have HPs who seem to believe that there is "good radiation" 
     and "bad radiation" how in the world can we hope to get anywhere with 
     the general public???
     
     Obviously my opinion only...
     
     If anyone wishes to flame me, let's keep it via private email so as 
     not to waste the time of the 3000+ RADSAFE subscribers.
     
     Steven D. Rima, CHP, CSP
     Manager, Health Physics and Industrial Hygiene
     MACTEC-ERS, LLC
     steven.rima@doegjpo.com


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Ra, 25 mrem/y
Author:  Dan Burnstein <npro1@ziplink.net> at Internet
Date:    12/11/99 1:46 PM


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