Re: "Tritium on Ice"

[RuthWeiner@AOL.COM]

In a message dated 10/1/02 9:25:51 AM Mountain Daylight Time, idias@interchange.ubc.ca writes:



> I agree, but its not the female child at risk but the female child's
>
> children. More information on the dose to the public from tritium can be
>
> found in the paper by Harrison et al in RPD Vol. 98 pp 299-311 (2002).


Now I am totally confused.  We have been exposed to tritium (as tritiated water) from atmospheric fallout since the mid-1950s.  Since tritium has a 12-year half-life, most of the somatic effects would have been seen by 1990 and any genetic effects would have shown up in those born between 1960 or so and 1990.  Has anyone observed any of these in, for example, a population exposed to surface water that would contain fallout tritium as compared to a population drinking well water that would contain much less or none?


It seems to me that the primary pathway for tritium to enter the human body is via water, and since all cells require water, tritiated water would not concentrate in any organ.  I would be most concentrated in the digestive tract (when you drink it), and carcinogenic effect would be reflected in cancers of the digestive tract.


Is my knowledge of physiology, so to speak, all wet?   


Ruth

Ruth Weiner, Ph. D.

ruthweiner@aol.com