We have eight decades of experience with radiation workers now. That is more than a sufficient sample size. If LNT was true, they should easily be able to prove it through epidemiological studies. ‘They’ have not.
Exactly so. There is considerable evidence the Liniar No Threshold (LNT) model is false. Yet, our whole nuclear regulatory scheme is based on it.
Not only that, but it has been extended to most other poisons.
We can detect poisons to extremely low levels now, which have, essentially, no effect. Yet the EPA keeps pushing to lower the acceptable thresholds. This makes everything cost much, much more.
From what I get out of the article, they are most concerned with ionizing radioation from reactors. But exposure is far more common than people believe.
Ionizing radiation is the most energetic form of radiation. X-rays are perhaps the best known type of ionizing radiation; other types include alpha, beta and gamma rays. (Gamma rays are emitted from radioactive materials while aslpha and beta require inhalation or injected to include entrance through open wounds of exposed skin for a problem) Ionizing radiation is naturally present in our environment and exposure to certain levels of it can’t be avoided. In fact, approximately 80 percent of all exposure can be attributed to naturally-occurring sources.
Only about 20 percent of exposure to ionizing radiation comes from man-made sources. Medical procedures, like diagnostic x-rays and radiation therapy, are the most significant contributors. But some consumer products, such as smoke detectors and televisions, also give off low levels of it. Individuals who smoke are exposed to ionizing radiation in tobacco smoke. So people who work in the field have to be aware of intake. People like lab techs, xray people, and military are especially instructed to keep count.
While exposure to ionizing radiation can be potentially dangerous, it’s believed that the body is able to successfully defend itself against and repair the damaging effects of low level exposures. This article reeks of chicken little.
wy69
From what I get out of the article, they are most concerned with ionizing radioation from reactors. But exposure is far more common than people believe.
Ionizing radiation is the most energetic form of radiation. X-rays are perhaps the best known type of ionizing radiation; other types include alpha, beta and gamma rays. (Gamma rays are emitted from radioactive materials while aslpha and beta require inhalation or injected to include entrance through open wounds of exposed skin for a problem) Ionizing radiation is naturally present in our environment and exposure to certain levels of it can’t be avoided. In fact, approximately 80 percent of all exposure can be attributed to naturally-occurring sources.
Only about 20 percent of exposure to ionizing radiation comes from man-made sources. Medical procedures, like diagnostic x-rays and radiation therapy, are the most significant contributors. But some consumer products, such as smoke detectors and televisions, also give off low levels of it. Individuals who smoke are exposed to ionizing radiation in tobacco smoke. So people who work in the field have to be aware of intake. People like lab techs, xray people, and military are especially instructed to keep count.
While exposure to ionizing radiation can be potentially dangerous, it’s believed that the body is able to successfully defend itself against and repair the damaging effects of low level exposures. This article reeks of chicken little.
wy69