Bureaucracy defends the status quo long past the time when the quo has lost its status. - Dr. Laurence J. Peter
In light of the available evidence showing either the hormesis model or a threshold below which no harm occurs, it is difficult to understand why anyone would cling to the LNT hypothesis. This question was addressed at the 1999 Tucson Waste Management Conference in Stanley Logan's paper, "Radiation Exposure: Overcoming Vested Interests That Block Good Science." [While I have borrowed heavily from Dr. Logan, I have embellished his material with my comments. In essence, the facts are his; the opinions are mine.]
After outlining the evidence for a re-evaluation of the entire radiation protection mechanism, Dr. Logan defined the following groups that oppose or ignore evidence pointing away from the LNT and collective dose theories. [Stanley E. Logan is founder of the Sante Fe consulting engineering firm that bears his name. A former associate professor of nuclear engineering, Dr. Logan has 27 years experience in areas of hazardous waste management and probabilistic risk analysis.]
Did you know that Japanese A-bomb survivors are outliving their unexposed peers? What if most of what you thought you knew about radiation is simply wrong? Find out how a rational assessment of radiation risks and benefits could offer increased health and vitality, as well as an avenue to nearly-limitless energy for the future.
Showing posts with label Stanley Logan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Stanley Logan. Show all posts
Saturday, April 16, 2016
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)