Re: Fear, etc.

["J.J. Rozental" <rozental@unisys.com.br>]

----- Original Message -----
From: Sandy Perle <sandyfl@earthlink.net>
To: Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2000 1:53 PM
Subject: Re: Fear, etc.


> Dan wrote the following:
>
> >  "Unnecessary" measurements? In the larger public health picture, taking
into
> >  account the fact that real health effects can be triggered by false
fears,
> >  anything that can be legitimately and honestly done at reasonable cost
to build
> >  or restore peace of mind is, in my opinion, a valid part of the
profession of
> >  health physics.
>
> Sorry Dan, but I have to respectfully disagree with your ultimate
> conclusion. While fear of any unknown may be a valid psychosomatic
> disorder, dealing with and trying to mitigate those fears is not our
> prime responsibility. Our job is to protect the public from "real"
> exposures to radiation and releases of radioactive materials. Dealing
> with one's fears is a job for psychiatrists and those who deal with
> social disorders.
>
I agree with your statement, however I would like to comment some aspects
taking into account my own experience, practical experience, conducting, as
general coordinator, the response of the Radiological Accident in Goiania,
the worst radiological accident to date. This radiological accident, that
happened in the Center of the town, in view of such singularity, unique in
the world, brought to light several adverse indicators not observed in
publications relating to emergency planning and preparedness. Two lessons
learned in Goiania with this subject were:
a) The necessity of better understanding by health physicist some
psychological population aspects during an accident, to manage public
emotions and to act in case of necessity;
b) The necessity to train psychologist to deal with public concerns in case
of an accident.
In this aspect, the lack of an adequate psychologist expert mediators to
balance misinformation and criticism of the authorities, was also reason, in
Goiania, for the psychological consequences, related with anxiety and
stress, expanded in the population, which increased by the loss of
confidence of the directly affected persons in the authorities and in the
governmental medical support.
In Goiania everyday, day after day, during months, we have to comment the
following public question:
If there are scientific controversy about low doses and high doses are
dangerous, what are our probability to get cancer in this context?
To answer the above question is not only blah blah blah.... During an
accident we need to combine the question with the emotion and fear. We have
to understand the relevance of emotions, particularly immediately after the
accident, when the stress and trauma of relocation, the breaking of social
ties, and the fear that any radiation exposure is damaging and could damage
people's health and their children's future. Certainly, to those part of the
population under the impression that they are being rejected by certain
attitudes of exclusion and discrimination.
Although I agree with Sandy, it is important to understand that  in the
initial phase, when fear and stress are at highest level, adjusting ability
(technical competence) and sensibility (consciousness) are the two most
import tasks that any staff member, part of any organization, should realize
while acting during a nuclear or radiological emergency.

Jose Julio Rozental
rozental@unisys.com.br (until next 16)
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

joseroze@netvision.net.il (after 17)
Israel



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