4 ms·

Reasonable doesn't necessarily mean correct. In the face of specific questions raised by doctors with expertise in this specific field, is reasonable is good en

Reasonable doesn't necessarily mean correct. In the face of specific questions raised by doctors with expertise in this specific field, is reasonable is good enough? From the NPR article: "The stated dose — about .02 microsieverts, a medical unit of radiation — is averaged over the whole body, members of the UCSF group said in interviews. But they maintain that if the dose is calculated as what gets deposited in the skin, the number would be higher, though how much higher is unclear." The observation about how high a dose gets deposited is a very specific observation made by people who actively apply radiation to people on a daily basis.

yummyfajitas 16y ago
In the face of specific questions raised by doctors with expertise in this specific field, is reasonable is good enough? You are trying to appeal to authority. That's a logical fallacy. Radiation transport, ionization mechanisms, and dosimetry are all fairly well understood topics. Not perfectly, but well enough that one can make reasonably good ab-initio predictions. The physicist is doing exactly that. Now, ab-initio dosimetry calculations are sometimes off by largish factors, (e.g., 500%) due to reactions of certain tissues. But they are rarely off by orders of magnitude, which they would need to be in this case for us to actually care. The doctors at UCSF are just scaremongering, regardless of their credentials.
- kenjackson 16y ago
  Radiation transport, ionization mechanisms, and dosimetry are all fairly well understood topics. Not perfectly, but well enough that one can make reasonably good ab-initio predictions. There are a lot of people that would disagree with this statement as it applies to the human body. I think its fair to say that there is no such thing as ab-initio studies when it comes to human reaction to radiation (at least none that are worth a lick).
- butterfi 16y ago
  "The doctors at UCSF are just scaremongering, regardless of their credentials." Thats a very blithe statement to make about a group of professionals. Here's the thing -- I know several people who have been treated for cancer at UCSF, and my understanding is that you couldn't ask for a better group of doctors/scientists. Their expertise is very well-regarded. So if taking the advice of a doctor who has made this his/her life's work is appealing to authority, then guilty as charged. If I'm going to try and make the best decision I can without understanding the topic as well as you seem to, I'm certainly not going to chose the people who generally work in the field over the the people with real medical experience. My plumber is a very smart guy who knows a lot about electrical, but I'm not going to hire him to re-wire my house. The devils is in the details, and I'm going with the guy who has a very good grip on the details.
- VladRussian 16y ago
  can somebody please down vote him? (i'll pay back with interest when i get my downvoting ability :)

yummyfajitas 16y ago

In the face of specific questions raised by doctors with expertise in this specific field, is reasonable is good enough? You are trying to appeal to authority. That's a logical fallacy. Radiation transport, ionization mechanisms, and dosimetry are all fairly well understood topics. Not perfectly, but well enough that one can make reasonably good ab-initio predictions. The physicist is doing exactly that. Now, ab-initio dosimetry calculations are sometimes off by largish factors, (e.g., 500%) due to reactions of certain tissues. But they are rarely off by orders of magnitude, which they would need to be in this case for us to actually care. The doctors at UCSF are just scaremongering, regardless of their credentials.

kenjackson 16y ago
Radiation transport, ionization mechanisms, and dosimetry are all fairly well understood topics. Not perfectly, but well enough that one can make reasonably good ab-initio predictions. There are a lot of people that would disagree with this statement as it applies to the human body. I think its fair to say that there is no such thing as ab-initio studies when it comes to human reaction to radiation (at least none that are worth a lick).
butterfi 16y ago
"The doctors at UCSF are just scaremongering, regardless of their credentials." Thats a very blithe statement to make about a group of professionals. Here's the thing -- I know several people who have been treated for cancer at UCSF, and my understanding is that you couldn't ask for a better group of doctors/scientists. Their expertise is very well-regarded. So if taking the advice of a doctor who has made this his/her life's work is appealing to authority, then guilty as charged. If I'm going to try and make the best decision I can without understanding the topic as well as you seem to, I'm certainly not going to chose the people who generally work in the field over the the people with real medical experience. My plumber is a very smart guy who knows a lot about electrical, but I'm not going to hire him to re-wire my house. The devils is in the details, and I'm going with the guy who has a very good grip on the details.
VladRussian 16y ago
can somebody please down vote him? (i'll pay back with interest when i get my downvoting ability :)