[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: dose limits for members of the public
Optimal Dose Level (ODL) -acute- was, indeed, 1-9 rads where 34 instead of expected 42.3 breast cancers were found in bomb survivors, for example.
Low dose rate ODL, however, might be many times that.
Taiwan apartments gave up to 600 rem, if I recall Luan correctly.
My patients having radiation oncology get about 10 x the acutely fatal dose, but spread over a couple of dozen daily treatments. If one were to
extrapolate linearly (smile!) -.
If db placebo studies confirm benefit I expect, 10 rem
radiohormesis therapy will have a very comfortable 10 x safety margin. Compare that with niacin or statin (to reduce cholesterol), where just 2x the
effective dose for one person may make another nauseous (even the same individual at different times, as with flu).
So, I would favor radiation supplement up to 10 rem/year -
1/10 of the symptom producing acute dose.
Howard Long
Jack_Earley@RL.GOV wrote:
> I wouldn't expect it to be much different from similar "optimum" levels in
> supplements, FDA guidelines, or medication label instructions. Especially
> since those levels change as we gain more information. I think we'd see
> standard applications of supplementary radiation, w/ the boilerplate "check
> w/ your doctor," etc. Or by prescription only unless it became as
> commonplace as tanning booths.
>
> Jack Earley
> Radiological Engineer
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jerry Cohen [mailto:jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 5:22 PM
> To: Sandy Perle; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu
> Subject: Re: dose limits for members of the public
>
> Sandy,
> You seem surprised that anyone might view 1.0 rem/a as an appropriate
> dose limit for general population. Those of us who believe in hormesis (a
> small but steadfast minority) hold that there is likely to be an optimal
> dose level at which people will derive the maximum benefit ( and least
> detriment) from radiation exposure.
> Perhaps you may recall some previous discussions on radsafe regarding
> possible methods of supplying supplementary radiation to those living in
> radiation deficient areas. I suppose it seemed like a joke to many but I,
> for one, seriously think that at some future time, the hormesis concept will
> become generally accepted and we will be thinking in terms of optimal dose
> levels. Unfortunately, that time will not arrive until LNT, ALARA, etc
> becomes unprofitable for its proponents, and that will likely be a long
> time from now.
> However, when that time comes, the idea of dose limits will become
> outmoded and research will be directed toward determination of what
> constitutes optimal dose level (ODL). Some thoughts (conjectures) on the
> subject: [1] ODL will likely vary between individuals and/or population
> groups,[2] it will be recognized that DNA aberration is not the only
> biological effect of radiation and that there are a multiplicity of effects
> to various organs and tissues; some beneficial, some detrimental in nature,
> [3] the net effect (i.e. sum of all effects) will be dependent upon dose
> level, age, and the state of the recipient's health, [4] I believe that for
> most persons the ODL would be somewhere greater than 1.0 rem/a and less than
> 10.0 rem/a (well above current background levels).
> Anyone else have any thoughts on the ODL concept, pro or con?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Sandy Perle <sandyfl@EARTHLINK.NET>
> To: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 7:42 AM
> Subject: RE: dose limits for members of the public
>
> > > I voted for 1000 mrem per year
> >
> > Jack,
> >
> > You seriously believe that members of the general public should be allowed
> to
> > receive 1 rem/year above background and any dose from medical procedures?
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Sandy Perle Tel:(714) 545-0100 / (800) 548-5100
> > Director, Technical Extension 2306
> > ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Service Fax:(714) 668-3149
> > ICN Pharmaceuticals, Inc. E-Mail: sandyfl@earthlink.net
> > ICN Plaza, 3300 Hyland Avenue E-Mail: sperle@icnpharm.com
> > Costa Mesa, CA 92626
> >
> > Personal Website: http://sandy-travels.com
> > ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com
> >
> >
> > ************************************************************************
> > You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
> > send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
> > radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.
> You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/
> >
>
> ************************************************************************
> You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
> send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
> radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.
> You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/
> ************************************************************************
> You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
> send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
> radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/