Thanks for pointing to this very thorough response which addresses the concerns of the letter. I don't think the authors of the letter are spreading FUD, howev

Thanks for pointing to this very thorough response which addresses the concerns of the letter. I don't think the authors of the letter are spreading FUD, however: they're asking for more information about the means by which the dose is being calculated and pointing out potential health consequences of the lower-energy beam in skin absorption: <em>if the key data (flux-integrated photons per unit values) were available, it would be straightforward to accurately model the dose being deposited in the skin and adjacent tissues using available computer codes.</em> This looks like science to me, not FUD.