I have not seen the exact methodology where these numbers came from, and I don't know if I'd be qualified to analyze them if I did.
The main point I was trying to make is that the European Committee on Radiation Risk makes much of discounting the similar work done by the International Commission on Radiological Protection, claiming that the latter is driven entirely by an industry agenda so that all their work should be suspect.
The fact that the ECRR is driven by a political agenda is apparently not taken into account when judging their work.
Objectively, of course, accusing either organization of having ulterior motives does not in and of itself prove the truth or falseness of either sets of numbers. But at the very least an equal amount of skepticism should be applied to both, and I fear that most of the media will take the ECRR position without a second glance.
Current Events » in reply to Tom, your article raises some serious questions
Serious questions
The whole thread (25 posts)
- Anti-nuke groups open another battle front
- Tom, your article raises some serious questions
- Get with it Tom......
- Greenhous Environmental Science Syndrome (GESS)