Re: How dangerous is radiation?

Wed, 09 Jul 2014 13:06:40 -0700 



________________________________
 From: John Clark <[email protected]>
To: [email protected] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 8, 2014 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: How dangerous is radiation?
 


On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 2:22 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List 
<[email protected]> wrote:



> You did not read the study I posted did you? 

>>No, and I'm quite certain you didn't either,

Actually I did... and I am not trying to defend the LNT methodology for 
assessing risk. It just seemed to me that you were suggesting that a low dose 
environment is not dangerous when spread over time. The evidence however 
suggests otherwise -- for Radon gas. Exposure to Radon leads to an increased 
risk of lung cancer & Leukemia as well -- and this has been abundantly 
documented. 
These are not severe high dosage exposures all at once -- instead they are low 
dosage exposure over long periods of time. The kind of scenario you suggest is 
low risk. For Radon the evidence is that there is a definite and measurable 
risk from low dose exposure over time.


> The 
epidemiological evidence linking exposure to Radon to increased risk of 
cancer is evident. The study is very well referenced and conclusive.
>

>>For the third time I'm not questioning the fact that Radon can cause cancer, 
>>what I want to know is if half the radon will cause half the number of 
>>cancers.  Everybody would say yes because everybody assumes the Linear No 
>>Threshold theory is true. But is it? Where is the evidence in support of it? 

Okay. I don't have an answer for you on that. However, on the other hand, low 
dosages of Radon gas over a long period of time do lead to significant increase 
of risk for death by cancer. 
Doesn't this clear statistical correlation born out by these long duration 
studies on Radon quite clearly indicate -- that at least for certain 
radionuclides -- low dose contamination is a real problem when it occurs for 
long periods of time?
We are not talking about acute Radon dosage. The studies are regarding 
occupational low doses (as well as people living in homes contaminated by radon 
gas entering environments with poor air circulation.




The survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki who received 2000 millisieverts of 
radiation were 7.9 times as likely to get Leukemia as the general population of 
Japanese, If they received half that amount of radiation (1000 millisieverts) 
and the LNT theory was true  you would expect them to be 3.95 times as likely 
to get that disease but instead they were only 2.1 times as likely; and if they 
got 200 millisieverts they were 4% LESS likely and with 100 millisieverts they 
were 17% LESS likely to get Leukemia. Somebody please explain to me how these 
NONLINEAR results are consistent with the LINEAR No Threshold theory.

The survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki who received more than 100 
millisieverts were more likely to develop solid cancers than the general 
population of Japanese, but those who were under 100 millisieverts were not. 
Somebody please explain to me how the existence of such a THRESHOLD is 
consistent with the Linear NO THRESHOLD theory. 

None of the data spurts the Linear No Threshold theory,  and yet the UN and the 
NRC and the WHO and just about every other organization you can name operates 
under the assumption that the LNT theory is true and makes policy accordingly. 

 If it is wrong then I agree it should be re-looked at using all available data.
Chris



  John K Clark



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
























					Reply via email to