Uranium poisoning (education at NIEHS)

["Bjorn Cedervall" <bcradsafers@hotmail.com>]

OK got the needed information and just sent off the letter below to NIEHS./ 
Bjorn Cedervall  bcradsafers@hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------
Dear Sir or Madam,

I have with some astonishment now seen your fact sheet about "uranium 
poisoning" for more than a year: 
http://www.niehs.nih.gov/external/a2z/page4.htm

The problem is not that uranium is radioactive - any uranium poisoning 
should reasonably be discussed in terms of its chemical forms and effects. A 
student (or non-specialist teacher) however usually lacks enough perspective 
and context of the subject to understand the distinction between radiation 
effects and chemical toxicity. An appropriate perspective of the effects of 
radiation - which shouldn't be the issue (poisoning) here - is that of 
naturally occuring radioactive elements, cosmic radiation and ultraviolet 
light from sun exposure.

"A single high dose of radiation can kill". What does this mean? Yes it is 
indeed true that radiation can kill if you get a high enough dose - but in 
most situations it is very unlikely that one will experience such a dose 
(and the "low dose" and corresponding late effects like cancer is yet 
another topic that a non-specialist may subconsciously include in his/her 
mind reading this - the expressions "high dose" and the word "can" (kill) 
lack in clarity): A single dose of sodium chloride, or even water can also 
be lethal if given in a high enough amount and certain conditions. The 
radiation from uranium is nothing extraordinary as the reader of your text 
may very well think (a 130 pound person undergoes 6000 atomic decays every 
second due to the occurence of natural potassium 40 and other radioactive 
elements in his/her body). But most important - killing levels of radiation 
are irrelevant to the topic "uranium poisoning".

In addition, the word "dose" is often misinterpreted as meaning 
"concentration" (formally dose is the time integral of a variation in 
concentration) or "dose-rate" - even by scientists who happen to work in the 
wrong field. The word "dose" is also vague because it has to refer to a 
target (mass or volume). Therefore, I suggest that most people among the 
public will not get any deeper level of understanding from a sentence like 
"a single dose... can kill".

I think that you would benefit from having a professional from the field of 
radiation and/or nuclear physics and chemistry to go over the mentioned 
paragraph carefully and check every word and concept in terms of relevance 
and perspective. When one finds texts like the "uranium poisoning" on your 
site, one becomes sceptical about any of the other related texts.

As I see it, this is not only about education, but also about image. 
Furthermore, this is an international issue since the NIEHS appears with its 
authority - the texts may easily be found and in turn quoted by Internet 
users in other countries.

With the words above I represent myself,

Bjorn Cedervall,
Brief personal background:
Associate Professor (Medical Radiation Biology & Medical Radiation Physics, 
Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm)
MSc (Nuclear Chemistry, Biochemistry, and Engineering, Royal Institute of 
Technology, Stockholm)
Radiology Specialist, SwedPower

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

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