|
RadSafe Folks --
Many years ago, when I was a young, green rad
protection person, I saw an article in a professional journal -- the Health
Physics Journal, if memory serves, but it might have been another one -- on a
radiography overexposure. The article was a followup report on a person who
had been injured several years earlier by absentmindedly putting a radiography
source in the back pocket of his trousers.
A photo showed him from the rear, naked, with a
chunk of flesh missing from one buttock and an ugly twisted scar across it. I am
sure he needed a cushion under one side in order to sit comfortably. The text of
the article related how the tissue had deteriorated and died over the weeks
after the exposure. It also stated that he was impotent for a year or two after
recovery and infertile for several years. Subsequently he and his wife had a
baby girl, who at the time of the writing appeared to be okay. I think he
resumed work as a radiographer.
Did the guy die? No. Did he suffer adverse effects
on his health that will continue all his life? No (unless he gets cancer from
the exposure, unless his spinal disks deteriorate from the asymmetry, etc.). Did
he suffer adverse effects on his quality of life, including his peace of mind
about his future? Yes!
This article made a big impression on me and with
other similar articles affected my mindset about compliance issues and what dose
means to the "little guy" as opposed to what it means to rad professionals. I
hope that none of us makes a big fuss about truly negligible dose and truly
minor errors, but I hope that we all realize that "little" noncompliances and
"small" oversights in good practices can lead to serious and unforeseen
consequences. We should not minimize the importance of formulating effective and
practical rules and then making sure they are followed.
Janet Westbrook
|