[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: dose limits for public & ODL



Howard,

    Sorry, but I made a typo in my earlier message. It should have read that

the optimal dose level (ODL) for most persons would lie somewhere between

1.0 and 100 rem/a (0.01-1.0 Sv/a), with

10 rem/a being the log-mean of that rather broad range. Of course, for

individuals, the ODL would likely be dependent on dose rate and many other

factors. In any case, I believe that future radiation protection programs

will focus on achieving ODL rather than setting dose limits. Unfortunately,

I doubt that most of us will live to see that happen.  Jerry



----- Original Message -----

From: <hflong@postoffice.pacbell.net>

To: <Jack_Earley@RL.GOV>

Cc: <jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET>; <sandyfl@EARTHLINK.NET>;

<radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 10:30 PM

Subject: 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/