Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Los Alamos Laboratory: Controversies. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
8 pages in length. The extent to which controversies have historically surrounded the Los Alamos National Laboratory have been both grand and far-reaching; that it has been branded a covert experimentation of massive proportions upon unwitting humans speaks to the nature of its contradictory existence. Whether the discussion turns to funding, operations or the fundamental purpose of why it was created in the first place, the one common denominator that links all controversy is the concept of ethics. Bibliography lists 7 sources.
Page Count:
8 pages (~225 words per page)
File: LM1_TLCAlmos.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
unwitting humans speaks to the nature of its contradictory existence. Whether the discussion turns to funding, operations or the fundamental purpose of why it was created in the first
place, the one common denominator that links all controversy is the concept of ethics. II. DENYING THE TRUTH Laboratory physicist Mario E. Schillaci sums up the unethical approach to
radiation exposure testing conducted at the site by trivializing the potentially significant risk to what have been termed as human Guinea pigs. Schillaci (1995), who helped compose the Los
Alamos treatise pertaining to ethical concerns addressed in previous human-based radiation experiments, discredits any worries people may have had with the radiation level by stating in Radiation and Risk that
any detrimental impact from low-dose radiation is merely hypothetical in nature. Critics quickly attacked such an apathetic attitude by pointing out that while findings may have been scientifically unproven,
there was enough theoretical support to believe they may, indeed, be real. Schillaci (1995) went on to say that "the jury is still out" (p. 92) as to whether
or not the doses in question are beneficial and then jumps right into a condensed oratory on the notion of nuclear power: "It seems sensible to this author to
cut off concern with the risks accompanying exposure to manmade radiation at some sensible fraction of the dose due to natural background radiation...We must choose, as a society, to begin
to treat the risks associated with manmade radiation rationally, or to continue to deal with these risks emotionally...Nowhere is this choice framed more sharply than in the issue of nuclear-power
generation" (Schillaci, 1995, p. 115). Schillaci (1995), like so many others who share his mindset, do not acknowledge any social, ethical, political or physiological risk involved with low-dose radiation
...