Radiation Protection - Fear, Education and Reality

["Sandy Perle" <sandyfl@earthlink.net>]

This issue is and should be on interest to all health physicists, and 
other who deal with public information. I've attempted to explain why 
I wrote the initial posting. Some have misinterpreted what I was 
saying, and what we should be doing, based on my posting. Perhaps I 
was unable to make myself clear as to what I wanted to say and 
accomplish. So, I'll try and be a little more deliberate. I'll base 
my comments on what one of my accountabilities was at FPL, for the 22 
years I worked there, as part of risk communication to the media and 
general public in the event of an incident (real or drill related):

(1) My primary goal in the ENC (Emergency News Center) was to support 
the Emergency Control Officer (ECO) - the highest ranking utility 
executive, on radiation risks to the public, and site staff, from a 
release of radioactive material off-site, or, to direct radiation. 

(2) To accomplish this prime accountability, facts were provided 
during the on-going briefings, to not only address what had happened, 
but what was a currently occurring, and what was expected to happen 
based on known data and projections.

(3) I provided data. I did not provide speculation. When I didn't 
know an answer, I obtained data and other information to respond to 
questions. I did not speculate. I answered questions in layman's 
terms, since the public isn't going to understand a lot of highly 
technical jargon and acronyms. Above all else, I was candid and 
honest, and told it like it was, like it is, and like it will be, to 
the best of my ability. The worse thing that could happen in an 
incident is the loss of one's credibility.

(4) The above is all considered education. If I can educate the press 
in what is happening in an on-going incident, the public is also 
being educated. The key is to obtain cooperation from the media. 
Having been involved in several real incidents, the media for the 
most part had been realistic and honest. Others were not. That's the 
name of the game. You do what you have to do.

(5) I addressed the reporting above. What about establish direction 
for rad protection activities during an incident. We gathered data to 
dete5rmine the extent of the incident, which was used to make our 
recommendations. Actions taken were taken based on real facts 
regarding the incident at hand. We did not take actions solely for 
the purpose of making it look like we were doing something. That is a 
waste of resources, which is a problem in any event. When an incident 
is on-going, shifts need to be established. It is a waste of effort 
to be using resources to perform an unnecessary function, when there 
is real work to be done.

(6) When all is said and done, if actions such as continuing 
monitoring stations are set-up, ground deposition monitoring 
continues, dosimetry is put out in the field, and constantly 
collected to determine dose extent ... ALL done when it is positively 
known that none of these actions are required .. then we do the 
industry a disservice. At the same time we promulgate the notion that 
there is a risk, and that there could be a risk again in the future. 
We HPs and others in rad protection need to deal with the facts .. 
and address real issues. If we do  not, then we become a part of the 
fear that exists in the public. This is the same as when we have 
emergency drills that are not plausible, with releases that can not 
happen, and doses are received by the public that can not happen ... 
these items become known as plausible, and therefore, potentially a 
possibility. We are then no better than those we criticize for 
passing on false information regarding risk and health.

We need to educate. We do not need to mislead. We need to be factual. 
We do not need to speculate. In the end, we and are families are 
members of this general public. We don't want to be lied to or 
mislead. Neither do our neighbors and other members of the general 
public. We need to expend our resources and $$ on protecting .. not 
placating and making others "feel good" when there is no need.

I'll end now.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy Perle					Tel:(714) 545-0100 / (800) 548-5100   				    	
Director, Technical				Extension 2306 				     	
ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Division		Fax:(714) 668-3149 	                   		    
ICN Biomedicals, Inc.				E-Mail: sandyfl@earthlink.net 				                           
ICN Plaza, 3300 Hyland Avenue  		E-Mail: sperle@icnpharm.com          	          
Costa Mesa, CA 92626                                      

Personal Website:  http://www.geocities.com/scperle
ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com

************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html