RE: DOE low dose research funds

[Steven Dapra <sjd@swcp.com>]

Jan. 22



	John Cameron wrote (in part):



	"DOE may have changed the rules but originally their research support was

only to look for risks from low doses. I contacted them about doing a

double blind  study of increased background to senior citizens in the Gulf 

States. They replied that they could not support research for 

radiation benefits."



	Why do you suppose it is that DOE won't look for radiation benefits?



	DOE is a regulatory agency, and without something to regulate some of its

employees are going to be out of a job.  Perhaps more to the point, the DOE

would lose a lot of its power.



	Note the following:



	"In a 1995 article, Jim Muckerheide reported (p. 30) that at the 1981

International Conference on Radiobiology of Radium and the Actinides in

Man, Robley Evans stated that there was a threshold for radiogenic tumors

in people exposed to Ra-226.  But, continued Muckerheide,



	"After the 1981 international conference and Evans' summary, the CHR

[Center for Human Radiobiology] was incrementally constrained and defunded

by the DOE, beginning in 1983, when annual reports were stopped, to 1986,

when new cases and case follow-up were stopped.  Finally, in 1992, the

program was terminated, even though more than 1000 cases are still alive."



	In an editorial in the same issue of Nuclear News (Zacha 1995, p. 3),

Nancy Zacha commented briefly on Muckerheide's article, and on the

difficulty of showing that there are no adverse health effects at low

levels of exposure.  She noted that "In some cases, in fact, the low

radiation doses seem to have had a positive health effect - that is,

members of the cohort are <healthier> than their control counterparts

[Zacha's emphasis]."  Zacha added:



	"Research in this area is being curtailed, not expanded, in some cases

because of political agendas, and in other cases because of lack of

financing.  Indeed, one of the most noted programs, that of the Radiation

Effects Research Foundation (RERF), . . . just recently survived a threat

to its integrity.  Through strong intervention from the scientific world .

. . the Department of Energy was forced to back off from its stated

intention to take over the program from the National Academy of Sciences, a

move that many saw as an attempt to politicize or even suppress its work."



Steven Dapra

sjd@swcp.com



REFERENCES



Muckerheide, J.  The health effects of low-level radiation:  Science, data,

and corrective action.  Nuclear News.  38(11):26-34; September, 1995.



Zacha, N. J.  A Gordian "Not".  Nuclear News.  38(11):3; September, 1995.























************************************************************************

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/