[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
smoke....
This post comments on a few of the recent 'smoking'
remarks from different posts. I've tried to keep
things related to radiation safety as best as
possible.
Point "4" is probably the most important and relevant.
1. The major carcinogens in tobacco smoke are
polycyclic organic compounds. Polonium and other
decay chain members are not believed to be the primary
culprits:
Rubin H. Synergistic mechanisms in carcinogenesis by
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and by tobacco smoke:
a bio-historical perspective with updates.
Carcinogenesis. 2001 Dec;22(12):1903-30. Review.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov:80/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11751421&dopt=Abstract
Here is a list of culprits:
http://www.repace.com/fact_exp.html
2. I think that economic incentives (lowered
health/life insurance rates for non smokers/non(low)
drinkers/seatbelt users and for corporate insurance
plans in workplaces with few smokers are hired),
promoted by Milton Friedman) are an excellent idea.
3. Here's an _opinion._ _I just don't like_ some of
the opinions I've seen voiced here in the past few
days, particularly the ones that support 'smokers'
rights.' It seems like I've already heard almost all
of them before from a very heavy smoker (deceased -
lung cancer)...comments like "I have a right to smoke
where/when I want to," and, "people who are called to
their maker early are cheaper to the taxpayers" than
the ones who stick around."
------------
4. I think that general health attitudes can be read
by coworkers at the workplace rather easily.
Attitudes _are_ contagious and they do reflect a
person's values. A safety person who demonstrates at
least an attempt to promote good personal health
practices is more *credible* to me than a safety
person who seems concerned about the rights of smokers
to light up and blow smoke my way.
-------------
Imagine the following situation (not realistic and not
autobiographical): "I" am a tradesperson of some kind
who is not trained in radiation safety. "I" used to
play football in high school, and I still like to go
and do active things on the weekends. "My" job
involves working in a radiation area, because I got
hired to do work there. I use tools like wrenches,
hammers, drills etc. I know rather little about
radiation. After all, I can't see it or feel it. I
have no idea what LNTH is, and have no/little opinion
about how many photons are too many. I have a choice
of 2 possible HP people to work with (I didn't say
this was realistic). I want to choose, above all,
someone whom I can trust who will look out for my
health. The first HP smokes (fortunately, outside in
the smoking area) but grumbles about not being allowed
to smoke in the lunchroom. This person goes home
after work and watches TV. The second HP that I can
choose does not smoke and takes a two mile walk after
work, and brings a bag of salad along with their
lunch. As a tradesperson who doesn't know too much
about radiation but who knows that an active lifestyle
is healthier than smoking and leading a sedentary
lifestyle, I have asked to work with the second HP,
because that person seems more like someone I can
trust to look out for my health and safety on the job,
because he/she demonstrates good general health
habits.
--------------------
While I realize that some people see a 'parallel'
between overregulation of radiation and smoking
ordinances, I think that view is a little superficial.
The folks here have the opportunity to do _much_
better, because folks have access to decent summaries
of risk analysis information (Cohen 1991) and also
because there is a good chance that longevity can be
prolonged with low dose rate radiation (Caratero et
al. 1998). Conversely, I don't think that any of the
researchers who blew cigarette smoke at rats found any
increased longevity!
~Ruth 2
===================================================
Caratero, A., M. Courtade, L. Bonnet, H. Planel, and
C. Caratero. 1998. Effect of a continuous gamma
irradiation at a very low dose on the life span of
mice. Gerontology. 44(5):272-276.
Cohen, B.L. 1989. Expected indoor 222Rn levels in
counties with very high and very low lung cancer
rates. Health Phys. 1989 Dec;57(6):897-907.
Cohen, B.L. Catalog of risks extended and updated.
Health Phys. 1991 Sep;61(3):317-335. Review.
================================================
The cheapest
> person, for society, is one that works all his life,
> pays taxes (including sin taxes) and drops dead from
> a heart attack the day he retires.
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
http://launch.yahoo.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/