[ RadSafe ] More "protection"

[Muckerheide, James]

Friends,

 

This is about non-ionizing radiation protection.  Note the ref to the rules
to protect workers, primarily telecommunications and electricity industry
workers.  The were Congressionally mandated scientific reviews in the U.S. in
the 1990s on this, which seemed to have found no evidence of risks to
workers.  Does anyone know how the EU/UK guidelines/proposed rules compare to
applicable U.S. regulations? And whether any U.S. rules apply to MRI
physicians as well as telecomm and electrical workers?

 

Regards, Jim Muckerheide

======================

 

Published online: 20 September 2005; | doi:10.1038/news050919-4 


Radiation law to block doctors' work


European regulations on MRI scans too strict, experts say. 

Jennifer Wild

Doctors across Europe are complaining loudly about new regulations on
radiation exposure, which they say will needlessly hinder their use of
magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) when treating patients. 

The European Union Physical Agents Directive, set to become law in April
2008, is aimed at protecting workers in telecommunications and the
electricity industry from possible health risks caused by exposure to
electromagnetic radiation. 

Strong fields can induce a current within tissues, which heats them up and
may cause damage. Some controversial studies have suggested that such fields
may also damage DNA.

But the rules will also keep doctors away from MRI machines, which are
another source of electromagnetic radiation. This will prevent nervous
patients from being accompanied during scans, and may even restrict proper
cleaning of the devices. 

Slim evidence

Doctors say that MRI scanners are not dangerous, and that although the
electromagnetic frequencies from these devices can gently heat tissues and
stimulate nerves in the spine, this does not lead to damage because the
heating effects are miniscule.

Peter Mansfield, a retired Nobel Prize winner who played a key role in
developing MRI, says the regulations are detrimental and "should be sent back
to the drawing board". 

He and others note that MRI scans have been used to see inside the human body
since the beginning of the 1980s, with no known ill effects.

Any firm evidence of adverse effects from standing next to a scanner is
sparse, says Ian Young, a retired engineer who helped to build the first MR
scanner for medical imaging. He adds that unpublished conference abstracts
may have fuelled the directive and the advisory guidelines that precede it.

Michael Clark, a scientist at the Health Protection Agency in the UK, says
the directive is designed to protect workers. He admits that doctors are
right to point out the lack of clear evidence of harmful effects, but says:
"We are dealing with a new technology and perhaps a bit of caution is
necessary". "We can't rule out any long-term effect," he warns.

The directive will turn the UK's current advisory guidelines into law. These
guidelines are based on the advice of the International Commission on
Non-ionizing Radiation Protection and the National Radiological Protection
Board. Researchers say these guidelines are also strict, but few people have
complained as they are only voluntary.

Worst afflicted

The patients most affected by the changes will probably be anxious children
and patients requiring specialized heart investigations. In the absence of a
comforting hand, scared children may undergo more harmful but less
intimidating X-ray imaging. And nervous patients may have to be anaesthetized
before being scanned, subjecting them to an unnecessary risk.