Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Rationalista's avatar

Nothing like an unfalsifiable argument that changes over time. That is what passes for “science” now in almost every field.

The NRC already have the answer, and their jobs depend on that answer. Therefore they can point to any tiny data gap in your model even though theirs is wholly inconsistent from the start.

Expand full comment
Jeremy's avatar

Jack, I have read all your articles and I admire how thorough each one is.

I'm not sure if this is the correct page to ask this but...

I have recently undergone two CT scans... one of the pelvis at 8 mSv and two weeks later I had one of the chest/neck at 12 mSv. These doses have been confirmed by the radiology dept.

Based on current data, how much would these scans have increased my risk of cancer?

Apologies for such a basic question within such a nuanced debate but any response from anyone would be greatly appreciated.

Expand full comment
26 more comments...

No posts