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

RE: LNT and resources [Was: Scientific responsibility]





My example is rather plain and the exposure rate limit and distance is the

standard we must meet for a glove box. My company produces most of the

world's demand for radioisotopes for nuclear medicine. Enough said.



You say that you have not "heard" of experiences such as these. All I can

say is that it can happen, it does happen, and I have seen it happen. You

simply were not privy to such experiences. What of it?



Note that regulatory limits apply to all aspects of the production and the

accrued costs are anything but "chump change". The result is that some

radioisotope technologies that may be better-suited for the task at hand

cannot be brought to market.



We should try to stick to the facts at hand and not base counter-arguments

on the lack of personal experience. Others are bound to have experiences

beyond your own. One should simply do the (tangible/concrete) math for

themselves.



Respectfully yours,



Grant





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

From: John Jacobus [mailto:crispy_bird@yahoo.com]

Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 12:49 PM

To: NIXON, Grant (Kanata); radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Subject: RE: LNT and resources [Was: Scientific responsibility]





Grant,

I find your example a bit convoluted.  You shield and

monitor your workers to reduce expouses below some

regulatory limit.  I do not understand why you picked

3 mR/h at 6 inches.  Where I work, we do basic medical

and biological research, and do this kind of work all

the time.  



I have never heard of a medical research program that

could not be funded due to costs for safety,

radiological or not.  Have you?  When you talk about

programs that run $100k or more, the cost of shielding

boxes is "chump change."  



Again, have you heard of a program that was not

started due to cost of radiation protecion equipment?





--- "NIXON, Grant (Kanata)" <GNIXON@MDS.Nordion.com>

wrote:

> 

> Hi John,

> 

> Here is a very simple example:

> 

> Say you are in the cancer-fighting business and wish

> to try-out a promissing

> new technology. You wish to build a glove box to

> handle, say 10 Ci, of a

> radionuclide that, aside from its predomiantly

> low-energy spectrum, happens

> to have a very low-intensity (say, 0.01%/dis)

> high-energy component (say,

> 500 keV). 

> 

> Try designing a (transparent) glove box (or one with

> a see-through window)

> that effectively reduces the transmitted field to

> below 3 mR/h at 6 inches

> from the glove box surface, as required by

> legislation. You will find that

> the difficulty and cost associated with this simple

> task is very high

> indeed.

> 

> You state that you "do not accept" that the

> resources (read "cost") involved

> pose a detriment to society. Cost and profits

> determine whether projects get

> completed. Not completing a project due to the high

> capital cost of a new

> form of cancer treatment can prove an obvious case

> of where there may be a

> detriment to society.

> 

> Respectfully yours,

> 

> Grant

> 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: John Jacobus [mailto:crispy_bird@YAHOO.COM]

> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 8:17 AM

> To: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

> Subject: LNT and resources [Was: Scientific

> responsibility]

> 

> 

> I have a question for the group.  Can anyone give a

> idea how replacement of the LNT with a different

> model, e.g., threshold at 500 mrem or 5mSv, will

> change how business will be done in radiation

> protection?  What practices will change?  Surveys?

> Documentation of environmental monitoring? Staff? 

> What legislation and regulations will change?  

> 

> More importantly, how much cash will be saved?  I

> will

> not consider that the "resources" saved will be used

> for public good.

> 





=====

-- John

John Jacobus, MS

Certified Health Physicist

e-mail:  crispy_bird@yahoo.com



__________________________________

Do you Yahoo!?

SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!

http://sbc.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/