|

UPDATE: Resolving issue of science of biological effects of low level radiation

ByRod Adams

A couple of weeks ago, Atomic Insights published an article about an initiative by past presidents and fellows of the American Nuclear Society (ANS) to encourage the organization to push for efforts to resolve the issue of the science of the biological effects of low level radiation.

Part of the effort includes gathering signatures from people that support the radical notion that science, not politics, should be the basis for regulations governing exposure to radiation and for information materials that explain the effects of radiation to non professionals.

Initially, the letter only accepted signatures from current and past ANS members. The initiative leaders have modified the letter and the web form to accept signatures from people who are members of 150 different organizations of nuclear and radiation professionals. There is a catchall category “Friends of Nuclear Energy/Medicine” for nuclear professionals who are not members of any of the listed organizations.

Please go and read the letter. If you agree that it proposes an important initiative that you can support, please sign it.

If you were already a supporter of the actions suggested in the letter but could not sign because you have no ANS affiliation, this is your chance to express your view.

Please notice that the letter provides alternative methods to sign that do not require you to enter information into a web-based form.

Avatar
Rod Adams

Rod Adams is Managing Partner of Nucleation Capital, a venture fund that invests in advanced nuclear, which provides affordable access to this clean energy sector to pronuclear and impact investors. Rod, a former submarine Engineer Officer and founder of Adams Atomic Engines, Inc., which was one of the earliest advanced nuclear ventures, is an atomic energy expert with small nuclear plant operating and design experience. He has engaged in technical, strategic, political, historic and financial analysis of the nuclear industry, its technology, regulation, and policies for several decades through Atomic Insights, both as its primary blogger and as host of The Atomic Show Podcast. Please click here to subscribe to the Atomic Show RSS feed. To join Rod's pronuclear network and receive his occasional newsletter, click here.

Similar Posts

Realistic dose limits and better predictive models will help Fukushima recovery

ByRod Adams

World Nuclear News published an article titled Consistency required for Fukushima return that mentions several topics worth increased discussion. It mentions the report recently completed by the IAEA that complimented Japan on its efforts to decontaminate areas that were affected by the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station radioactive material releases. Then it went on to…

What can Chatham, VA learn from Mt Airy, NC?

ByRod Adams

The leaders of Virginia Uranium need to talk with the leaders of the North Carolina Granite Corporation. VA Uranium is seeking to obtain permission to mine its granite formation while NC Granite is the current operator of a granite quarry that has been in continuous operation since 1889. If you will forgive the obvious pun,…

How Does Low Level Radiation Provide Beneficial Effects?

ByRod Adams

In a recent ANS Nuclear Cafe post, I mentioned the radiation hormeis theory proposed more than three decades ago by Dr. Don Luckey, a biochemist and nutritionist who wrote a book in 1980 titled Hormesis With Ionizing Radiation. According to Dr. Luckey and a number of other researchers in the field, a small dose of…

Arnie Gundersen going international

ByRod Adams

Arnie Gundersen has been making money by spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt about nuclear energy for more than a decade. His career has received a measurable boost since March 11, when a large earthquake and powerful tsunami successfully peeled off most of the many layers of protection at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station. Ever…

Doubt – confusion leads to inaction and benefits status quo

ByRod Adams

When there is an enormous revenue stream at stake, actions taken to delay making any changes can produce a good return on investment. There is no doubt in my mind that people interested in prolonging fossil fuel dominance over the world economy have taken action to insert doubt in the public consciousness about the hazard…

Recent Comments from our Readers

  1. Avatar
  2. Avatar
  3. Avatar
  4. Avatar
  5. Avatar

8 Comments

  1. “There is a catchall category “Friends of Nuclear Energy/Medicine” for nuclear professionals who are not members of any of the listed organizations.”

    I had the audacity to pretend that non-nuclear professionals (such as myself) might call themselves friends of nuclear energy and medicine.

  3. Glad to have the opportunity to fill out the form since I am not a member of ANS. However was disappointed that ASME was not included as one of the groups.

  4. No IEEE either…

    AIAA might be a little farfetched, but a lot of aerospace engineers have migrated to other fields.

    Wouldn’t hurt to have the American Bar Association on there.

  5. Well, I thought it was a stronger message to the ANS leaders when it came from actual ANS members.

    Not that support and opinions from non-members aren’t helpful; but I think there is value in a message from the “constituents.”

    Just my 2 cents…

  6. ASME not on the list, but I signed anyway.

    Also the premise seemed odd in that the petition asks ANS to debunk someone else’s “Hypothesis”. Doesn’t it seem like if you have a “Hypothesis” then the burden of proof is on you to defend it yourself, or to withdraw your hypothesis? Something just seems extremely dysfunctional about this whole situation.

Comments are closed.