[ RadSafe ] Re:Reasonable risk?

Thu Apr 20 14:40:04 CDT 2006

Jerry,
Health physicist like me are not dense.  However, we
often have to deal with people that are. 

To me, eating and drinking in laboratories where toxic
chemicals and biological agents are used is
unreasonable.  The IHs at this place let the
researchers do it.  

--- jjcohen at prodigy.net wrote:

> It is certainly nice to know that  ALARA policy
> recommends that radiation
> safety actions be reasonable in nature. I personally
> believe that ALL human
> actions should be reasonable, but that's just my
> opinion.  I haven't run
> across many advocates for unreasonableness, but if I
> do, I will cite the
> Health Physics ALARA policy to show them how things
> should be done.
> I wonder why Health Physicists are so dense, that
> they must be continually
> reminded to be reasonable.
> Jerry Cohen
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Flanigan, Floyd" <Floyd.Flanigan at nmcco.com>
> To: <jjcohen at prodigy.net>; "Michael Bohan"
> <mike.bohan at yale.edu>;
> <radsafe at radlab.nl>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2006 1:11 PM
> Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] In utero dose
> 
> 
> I beg to differ. ALARA is now a relatively universal
> concept used by
> industry. It is applied to all forms of risk whether
> radiological or
> not. Safety professionals and PRA engineers use it
> on a regular basis as
> well as OSHA in a manner. Any time risk can be
> reduced without causing a
> detriment it should be done. In the case of
> emergency x-ray, of course
> it is necessary to take the x-ray in order to
> provide proper, possibly
> life-saving treatment. That should be a
> "no-brainer". A good analogy
> would be that a man has a heart attack while
> crossing a busy street.
> Should you move him or perform CPR in the middle of
> traffic? The answer,
> of course, depends on the severity of the attack and
> the logistics
> involved in controlling traffic safely as well as
> other factors such as
> time of day/traffic flow, distance to nearest
> hospital, etc. etc. etc.
> Each case will have differing variables which will
> make the decision
> making process unique. It seems as though we are
> trying to paint this
> one in black and white and in the process are
> creating dissention.
> Conservative decision making takes into account all
> of these things and
> should be used by all in positions of
> responsibility. Right and wrong
> are not really applicable in many instances.
> 
> Floyd W. Flanigan B.S.Nuc.H.P.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On
> Behalf Of jjcohen at prodigy.net
> Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 10:25 PM
> To: Michael Bohan; radsafe at radlab.nl
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] In utero dose
> 
> Michael,
>     I am an Industrial Hygienist (CIH), and I resent
> your attempt to pin
> the
> ALARA nonsense on  Industrial Hygienists. ALARA is
> strictly a Health
> Physics
> invention, which IMHO was designed to justify the
> application of
> absurdly
> restrictive controls to operations involving
> ionizing radiation.
> Jerry Cohen
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Michael Bohan" <mike.bohan at yale.edu>
> To: <radsafe at radlab.nl>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 3:13 PM
> Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] In utero dose
> 
> 
> > Hello Floyd and RadSafer's:
> >
> > In medicine, the conservative approach (of ALARA
> for radiation) is
> > usually NOT advisable.  ALARA is specifically an
> industrial hygiene
> > practice that has been bastardized by some to
> apply to realms it was
> > never intended for.
> >
> > If there is a pregnant mother, who's been in a
> serious car accident,
> > the risk of having an undiagnosed condition that
> results in immediate
> > death to the mother and/or fetus, is real.   The
> theoretical risk of
> > even a 10 rad dose to her and the fetus are a very
> small concern in
> > comparison.  Even with a dose of 10 rad, the
> theoretical risk to the
> > fetus is about 1 in a thousand, and it might only
> be expressed many
> > years later.  However, the mortality of mothers
> and fetuses from
> > serious car accidents and undiagnosed trauma, is
> immediate and
> probably
> > would lead to 10's if not 100's of
> deaths/thousand, if modern
> > diagnostic tests are withheld due to radiophobia. 
> It should be
> > remembered that ALARA is meant to keep
> occupational workers well away
> > from any risk at all, even theoretical ones.  When
> reality strikes, we
> > need to use a different set of standards.
> >
> > ALARA does have a place in medicine.  Medical
> Physicists spend a lot
> of
> > time and energy making sure that all hospital
> equipment provides the
> > best diagnostic information for the smallest
> necessary dose.
> However,
> > ALARA should never be used to deny a patient a
> necessary diagnostic
> > procedure.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Mike Bohan, RSO
> > Yale-New Haven Hospital
> > Radiological Physics
> > 20 York St. - WWW 204
> > New Haven, CT 06510
> > Tele: (203) 688-2950
> > Fax: (203) 688-8682
> > Email: mike.bohan at yale.edu
> >
> > This message originates from Yale New Haven Health
> System. The
> > information contained in this message may be
> privileged and
> > confidential. If you are the intended recipient,
> you must maintain
> this
> > message in a secure and confidential manner. If
> you are not the
> > intended recipient, please notify the sender
> immediately and destroy
> > this message. Thank you.
> >
> > On Apr 18, 2006, at 2:32 PM,
> radsafe-request at radlab.nl wrote:
> >
> > > I realize this. But taking the conservative
> approach is always
> > > advisable. Hence ALARA. The lack of set limits
> is an issue which
> should
> > > be addressed. We cannot continue to let the
> medical world
> self-police.
> > > They have proven time and time again that they
> are prone to leaning
> to
> > > one extreme or the other. The limit should
> mirror occupational dose
> > > except, of course in the case of limits
> hindering treatment. All of
> > > this
> > > falls into the principals of ALARA in one way or
> another.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe
> mailing list
> >
> > Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to
> have read and
> understood
> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html
> >
> > For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe
> and other settings
> visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/
> 
=== message truncated ===

+++++++++++++++++++
"A scientist's aim in a discussion with his colleagues is not to persuade, but to clarify." 
Leo Szilard
-- John
John Jacobus, MS
Certified Health Physicist
e-mail:  crispy_bird at yahoo.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 