🚀 go-pugleaf

  In    [sci.physics.fusion:4530 [13 Dec 1992];
        greg@dent.uchicago.edu (Greg Kuperberg) states 


=  "My point is not that you know that there will be dangerous
=   amounts neutrons if there is cold fusion, but rather that there
=   might be.

    This is a very reasonable position, and in fact was supported by
 the very posting to which Greg Kuperberg was referring.  This
 caution is thus well reasoned.  


=   "But I was not informed of their (neutrons, and high energy
=    radiation) healing effects.  In fact I don't see how a massive
=    neutron burst from a cold fusion experiment could help you more
=    than it hurts you, but if you say it can, I'll consider that
=    possibility.

   This statement, coupled with an admission of a failure to be
 "informed", is a broad quick leap from logic.
   The Kuperberg interpretation is uncorroborated by the missive to
 which Kuperberg refers.  In fact, reading the original posting
 reveals that Kuperberg's statement simply does not portray
 that which the posting contained.
                                  
   The posting discussed misstatements made by "skeptics", and was
 in response to years of hearing such silliness upon which the
 skeptics have depended in this matter.
                             
  
    Radiation therapy (use of electrons, high energy x- (or
 gamma depending upon source) rays, and infrequently protons and 
 neutrons to treat cancer) involves careful control of the irradiator,
 shielding of the normal tissues, and planning planning planning.
    Obviously that is technology not available in "cold fusion"
 laboratory (or almost any other), nor are the products which
 are used by the radiation therapist even normally generated in such
 a laboratory, let alone controlled.  
                                                      
   Therefore, and in summary, the skeptics of "cf" continue to
 denigrate workers, theoreticians, and students in the "cf" field by
 falsely claiming that "megavoltage x-rays" and "neutrons" would
 "kill them all".  That statement is not necessarily true.  That is
 why the posting was made.  

   So why the prolonged confusion anyway?  (a few hypotheses)

  --  Could this be a diversion from, or a result of, the  "hot
 fusion" laboratories attempting to obscure their contaminations
 of their own laboratories, equipment, etc? 

  --  Perhaps, Dr. Kuperberg might give his analysis [Given that the
 origin of his missive is U. of Chicago] of the remnant activity in
 some buildings there which are reported to have within them
 significant induced radiation accruing from past experiments.

  --  Perhaps he (of the math dept.?) can give us an estimate of
 such induced radioactivity in the facilities of his own
 University, and/or some "hot fusion" labs.

  --  Is the confusion, and the leap (fall?) from logic,  here,
 yet another corroboration of the fragile shell(s) upon which the
 skeptics attempt to stand? 
 

==========================================================
       Mitchell R. Swartz              JET Technology
       mica@world.std.com              (617) 239-8383