Re: Children may get too much radiation in CT scan

[Bernard L Cohen <blc+@pitt.edu>]

On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, dkosloff1 wrote:

> Here is the origin of the risk estimate, with references.  The references
> all appear to be advisory bodies, with no regulatory bodies represented.
> 
> "Estimated Risks of Radiation-Induced Fatal Cancer from Pediatric CT"
> 
> "The linear extrapolation without a dose threshold that is used to
> extrapolate cancer risks to very low doses has been the subject of much
> debate [37,38,39,40]; however, the main regulatory and advisory groups that
> have reported on this issue [12, 13, 41, 42] have all concluded that the
> most scientifically credible approach to risk extrapolation to this dose
> range is a linear extrapolation from greater doses, which is the assumption
> implicitly adopted here."

> 37.  Strom DJ, Cameron JR, Cohen BL. The LNT model is appropriate for the
> estimation of risk from low-level (less than 100 mSv/year) radiation, and
> low levels of radon in homes should be considered harmful to health. Med
> Phys 1998;25:273 -278[Medline]

	--This was a combination of 3 papers, one by each of us. John
Cameron's and mine were showing how LNT was wrong, while Strom's supported
LNT. The title quoted here is from Dan Strom's paper.

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