Sir, - I would like to voice my objections to an article headed "Sellafield still main threat to Irish Sea" (Science Today, September 7th). Firstly, and most importantly, the article describes the falling levels of radiation within the Irish Sea, and quotes the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland deputy chief executive as saying that the levels "do not pose a significant health risk". In fact, there doesn't seem to be any connection between the headline and the actual content of the article. The statement that Sellafield was still a threat to the Irish Sea did not appear to have even been uttered by any of the sources quoted.
Secondly, no evidence is given to support the notion that Sellafield is a "main" threat and, if anything, the data contained within the article and statements by the RPII contradict this very idea. Other threats to the Irish Sea do exist, such as oil spills and over-fishing, but to claim in the headline that Sellafield is the main risk without any evidence to back it up is ridiculous.
The continued operation of Sellafield is an issue that the Irish public have strong opinions about. Printing articles explaining the facts surrounding those issues can only be a good thing. The act of using what was, in my opinion, a sensationalist, inaccurate headline for the sake perhaps of being "controversial" is inexcusable. Would a more suitable title such as "Sellafield radiation levels continue to drop" have sold as many papers? Maybe not, but it would have been accurate. - Yours, etc., James Fryar,
Warren Green, Baldoyle, Dublin 13.