Exactly! The model is wrong for low level, long term exposure. We know that, it’s not new or shocking. But there isn’t anything else, and you can make a decent argument there won’t be anything else either, so we’re kinda stuck with it.
I’m failing to see why you seem to be implying that low level exposure is dangerous then as we both seem to agree the current limits are abundantly over cautious as evidenced by high natural background exposure studies.
Exactly! The model is wrong for low level, long term exposure. We know that, it’s not new or shocking. But there isn’t anything else, and you can make a decent argument there won’t be anything else either, so we’re kinda stuck with it.
I’m failing to see why you seem to be implying that low level exposure is dangerous then as we both seem to agree the current limits are abundantly over cautious as evidenced by high natural background exposure studies.
I’m not?
I’m complaining about people who can only go “LNT bad, waaaah”. Put up something better to use.
I apologize for misinterpreting your comment