Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site alice.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!mhuxn!mhuxr!ulysses!allegra!alice!ark
From: ark@alice.UucP (Andrew Koenig)
Newsgroups: net.med,net.cse,net.periphs
Subject: Re: HELP! Need to show VDTs not dangerous to pregnant women
Message-ID: <4638@alice.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 29-Nov-85 12:14:53 EST
Article-I.D.: alice.4638
Posted: Fri Nov 29 12:14:53 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 30-Nov-85 06:41:16 EST
References: <938@lsuc.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Labs, Murray Hill
Lines: 12
Xref: watmath net.med:2866 net.cse:564 net.periphs:914

> Some students in the course who are pregnant are now objecting
> that they do not want to use a video display terminal, because
> they believe it is dangerous and related to birth defects.
> I would like to convince them that this is not the case,
> particularly when we're talking about an exposure of 7-10 hours
> over three months.

If the students to not want to use terminals because they believe
the terminals are harmful, then they are right!  They DO believe
the terminals are harmful!  My experience has been that arguing
that people's beliefs are unjustified usually does little toward
changing those beliefs, even when the arguments are valid.