PEP-T3.
The Case Against The LNT AL Fellman*, NV5 Dade Moeller
Abstract: Radiation safety programs must establish compliance with radiation regulations which continue to be based on the linear no-threshold (LNT) hypothesis and the ALARA principle, despite overwhelming sound, peer-reviewed science that demonstrates the existence of a carcinogenic threshold and/or hormesis at low doses. LNT and ALARA insist that when we make changes that lower worker dose by as little as one µSv, we are making the workplace safer. Public health authorities and many radiation safety professionals have convinced most members of the public that when we evacuate 150,000 persons following Fukushima to keep them from receiving tens of mSv, we are improving public health despite the fact that this decision has resulted in more than 2,000 fatalities among evacuees. Yet despite compelling evidence revealing LNT to be fraudulent, the consistent response taken by regulatory agencies and scientific bodies whose recommendations are cited as the basis of regulatory actions is to deflect or rationalize away the science at best or simply pretend it doesn’t exist at worst so as to maintain allegiance to a worldview of radiation safety built on ALARA and LNT. A sample of relevant findings supporting this allegation will be presented.
|
