170
RADIATION STANDARDS, INCLUDING FALLOUT
Chairman Houtrrerp. I think as usual you have made a very fine
contribution, Dr. Langham. I think your emphasis on the figures we
are dealing with cannot be overemphasized. We are dealing in millions of curies and millirad measurements which are so small in comparison to the amounts which are considered to be dangerous by the
consensus of scientific opinion that this should bring some solace and
some comfort to the people who have not been correctly informed and
who are emotionally upset by these figures that are given. I think
this is the importance of your testimony which is as I understand
the consensusof scientific testimony in general on this subject.
Asfar as you know,thereis no appreciable degree of scientific people
that are in opposition to your conclusion that you presented today.
Dr. Lanenam. There can be very little objection to the dose calculations, because it is rather amazing the uniformity one gets throughout the scientific community in the estimation of these doses. Just as
I was pointing out the difference between the numbers I came up with
and the Federal Radiation Council, these were completely independent
of each other and they are in very acceptable limits of each other.
The real controversy comes over arguing aboutthe effect of this small
dose, and this can be argued from the moralistic point of view, from
the pacifistic point of view, it can be argued from so many points of
view. Very frequently the pacifistic poimt of view have by far the
most vocal spokesmen. Theresult is that the public is confused and
the press is confused on this question of what effect it will have.
I remembera certain Nobel Prize winner whohas been very prominent in this particular aspects of things with whom I debated on a
panel once in which his key statement was, “I am scientist, and as
a scientist I feel as obligated to object to fallout if it harmed one
single individual in the population as if it harmed a hundred thousand,” to which my only commentis, “Yes, I am a scientist, too, and
I feel obligated to protect the democratic principles of one person just
as muchas I do to protect the democratic rights of 180 or 190 million.”
It dependsstrictly on what oneis setting as a sense of values. I happen to enjoy the right of appearing before a committee of my Government and saying exactly what I think, and to methis is worth a few
strontium units in my milk.
Representative Hosmer. The line you ended your testimony with,
in one sense did you mean that, about the people who are evaluating
the dangers of testing, or the test dangers? The last line of your
testimony.
Dr. Lancuam. If you can rememberthe last line of my testimony
you are better than I am.
Representative Hosmer. The fact that your worry was not so much
about the dangers of fallout as it was the people who were evaluating
other dangers.
_ Dr. Laneuam. It is nowestablished if there is no threshold to radiation damage then we must look upon it asa probability of risk. This
beingthe case we must weigh the potential gain as against the potential risk. We can evaluate the risk and I think we can evaluate it
perhaps to a factor of 2. Can we evaluate to a factor of 2 the im-
portance of further weaponstests to the defense of this country ?
Late
abe RRRTATARn teSEalcBRSGiaep siersghi septs