Perspectives in Biology and Medicine

PERSPECTIVES IN BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE Volume 23 ¦ Number 3 ¦ Spring 1980 LET'S KEEP OUR SENSE OF HUMOR IN DEALING WITH RADIATION HAZARDS LAURISTON S. TAYLOR* This discussion is intended to dwell upon what may be termed a proper sense of humor about radiation hazards and our protection against them. As a word, humor has a wide variety of meanings and uses [I]. However, they all stem from the medieval physiology in making reference to the four body fluids or humors, the study of which was thought to shed light upon the balanced condition of the body. It is in that general sense that the term is often employed to convey a sense of proportion and understanding and a realistic balancing of whatever facts and judgments may be under consideration at the time. A generally accepted step in appealing to an audience or readers is the device of introducing some element or story (often outrageous) that will attract attention. In the field of radiation—be it ionizing or otherwise—we scarcely need to apply any extra effort to attract attention to the possibility of radiation hazards. This situation is more than adequately taken care ofby our daily press and our magazines, especially the condensations and ladies' magazines. Unfortunately, it is through those instruments that the public is, for the most part, "educated" about radiation problems. Of the many dozens of these articles produced over the past 30 years, most, if not all, have contained gross errors of fact as well as what can only be regarded as deliberate distortions designed to alarm or excite the reader. Louis Nizer, in his book My Life in Court, repeatedly referred to what he called "trial by the press." This, of course, was applied to court and ?Robert S. Landauer Memorial Lecture, Oakland, California, November 14, 1979. Past president, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Address: 7407 Denton Road, Bethesda, Maryland 20014.© 1980 by The University of Chicago. 0031-5982/80/2303-0179$01.00 Perspectives inBiology andMedicine · Spring1980 | 325 legal situations, but he emphasized how the press, as a matter of policy, would emphasize one side or another of a given situation to the point where it was sometimes almost impossible to select an unbiasedjury. He pointed out how, in the legal arena, this made objective decisions so difficult. There is no question that the same kind ofsituation exists in the manner by which the press handles radiation risk situations. It should probably not be regarded as unreasonable that magazines or newspapers should select their literary presentations under the heavy influence of how it will affect their sales. On the other hand, care must be taken not to confuse sales promotions with factual objectivity, let alone social responsibility. Firsthand examples can be cited where a recognized authority has been told quite frankly that a given article presenting carefully thought through facts about radiation would not be acceptable because it would not help sell a magazine or where it was contrary to the policies of a particular newspaper. A problem faced by the press—and this also is not entirely its fault—is that in any country it will be unduly influenced by a small handful of individuals with some degree of technical training whose ideas have failed of acceptance by their colleagues. We have some half-dozen such individuals in this country. I refer to them as the U.S. Six (cf. Wilmington 10, Chicago 7). When their ideas have been rejected by their colleagues, it has been their practice to resort to the news media rather than the scientific media to air their ideas and plaints. One "scientist" even demands that only the general public be allowed to adjudicate his technical claims. These individuals are almost invariably motivated by some kind of complaint against a government agency or some laboratory , and hence they have that element which the media regard as essential to attract public attention. The tragedy of this is that a half-dozen of such people can attract more national publicity than the entire remaining recognized and objective profession. Moreover, through this kind of publicity the attention of our congressional lawmakers is frequently diverted to the problem, and pressures...