Re: dose limits for members of the public

[RuthWeiner@AOL.COM]

In a message dated 2/14/02 4:05:50 PM Mountain Standard Time, sandyfl@EARTHLINK.NET writes:



> It's sort of like saying, I drive a car, and I have 
>
> not not been injured, and obviously not been killed in one. THEREFORE, cars are 
>
> safe and do not injure people ... by reason of my personal experience.


As long as you are using the car analogy --- a driver can minimize his or her risk, by how and when and where he or she drives, the condition of the car, etc.  Moreover, we do not apply the linear non-threshold theory to driving.  By the same token, we do not consider mitigating factors with benzene inhalation  -- EPA just says "benzene is a carcinogen" and applies the LNT.  


In applying the LNT to the carcinogenesis of ionizing radiation, is background ever considered?  I don't believe so, because the EPA standards are negligible compared to, and indistinguishable from, background.  Moreover, there are many applications of diagnostic x-ray in which potential carcinogenesis is never considered. (No, it isn't always done the way it is in the dentist's office).  So it is perfectly reasonable to think "I have been exposed to so-and-so much x-ray, over decades, with no apparent ill effect, so isn't it possible that the relationship between x-ray and cancer is more complex than just a simple linear extrapolation back to zero?"

 

Ruth Weiner, Ph. D.

ruthweiner@aol.com