But if you cannot say there is no safe level, does that not mean that there is a safe level? What is it? Exposure below background is one thing, but going from there to saying low doses above background are safe because the statistics are flimsy seems like the wrong way around; if the statistics are flimsy we should not consider something to be safe. I’m thinking Fukushima and measured radiation “hot spots” outside the evacuation perimeter above background, that are considered “safe” because they happen to fall on a particular side of this flimsy fence. Perhaps, if all nuclear is replaced with aneutronic fusion, we will never need to know what the real safe level is.
