Seltzer, Michael William2014-03-142014-03-141993etd-12162009-020310http://hdl.handle.net/10919/46250The position of the United States Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) in the 1950s on the genetic hazards of fallout and radiation was a distortion of the views of geneticists from both sides of the classical/balance controversy, an intrascientific dispute among geneticists. In their attempt to demonstrate the harmlessness of test fallout, AEC officials argued that low levels of radiation were at worst genetically insignificant, and at best genetically beneficial. These arguments ran counter to the prevailing views of geneticists and represented a misleading attempt to deflect public and scientific criticism of the AEC’s atomic testing policies. Among the factors contributing to the distortion of views on genetic effects among the general public and government officials were the AEC’s unwavering commitment to atmospheric atomic testing; the failure to include geneticists in policy-making positions within the AEC and governmental radiation policy committees; confusion over the genetic effects to populations, as opposed to individuals; and the sharp polarization within the genetics community that resulted from the theoretical disagreements embodied in the classical/balance controversy, a dispute over the nature of genetic variation and evolutionary natural selection.v, 128 leavesBTDapplication/pdfenIn CopyrightLD5655.V855 1993.S447Nuclear energyPopulation geneticsThesishttp://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-12162009-020310/