[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Thyroid radiation doses are much too high
I find this a little confusing.
1. " To test how much difference it makes to
calculate the dose individually, Jonsson analysed 187
cases of Graves disease at Maimo University Hospital
between 1984 and 1988 in which doses of Iodine-131
were individually optimised. . . ."
So, the patients were given the optimised doses, not
the maximum doses?
2. ". . . She worked out that if the patients had
instead been exposed to a fixed 370 megabecquerels
they would have received an average of two-and-a- half
times as much radiation as they needed."
So, they were NOT given the maximum doses.
3. "That, Jonsson argues, would breach the
recommendation by the International Commission
Radiological Protection to keep radiation exposure "as
low as reasonably achievable". . . ."
It appears that is what physicians are doing since
they are giving the optimized doses. As for the
statement "She says some children in the US have been
given large fixed doses of Iodine-131, which she
describes as "horrible"," I am not aware any facility
that is doing this. Does anyone?
--- Fred Dawson <fd003f0606@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> New Scientist reports 6 March that Thyroid radiation
> doses are much too high
>
>
>
> Millions of people with thyroid disease are being
> given excessive doses of
> radiation that could increase their risk of
> contracting cancer. That's the
> conclusion of the Swedish Radiation Protection
> Authority (SSI), which says
> many hospitals around the world are ignoring
> international recommendations
> to minimize patients' exposure to radiation.
>
> Up to 5 per cent of women and a much smaller
> proportion of men contract
> Graves disease, an immune system defect causing the
> thyroid gland to produce
> too much hormone. For 50 years the disease has been
> treated by destroying
> all or part of the gland with radioactive
> iodine-131.
>
>
>
> But Helene Jonsson, an SSI inspector, says doctors
> fail to optimise the
> radiation dose for individuals, as they do with
> X-rays and CT scans. "With
> iodine therapy, they don't care," she told New
> Scientist. "It is a concern."
>
>
>
> Patients are commonly given a fixed amount of
> iodine-131, often 370
> megabecquerels, without taking into account the size
> of the thyroid gland,
> the amount of iodine it takes up and the amount it
> loses, Jonsson says. All
> of these can vary widely, and Jonsson is
> particularly worried about young
> people being treated in this way because their
> chances of developing cancer
> as a result in later life are higher. She says some
> children in the US have
> been given large fixed doses of Iodine-131, which
> she describes as
> "horrible".
>
>
>
> To test how much difference it makes to calculate
> the dose individually,
> Jonsson analysed 187 cases of Graves disease at
> Maimo University Hospital
> between 1984 and 1988 in which doses of Iodine-131
> were individually
> optimised. She worked out that if the patients had
> instead been exposed to a
> fixed 370 megabecquerels they would have received an
> average of two-and-a-
> half times as much radiation as they needed
> (Radiation Protection Dosimetry,
> vol 108, p 107).
>
>
>
> That, Jonsson argues, would breach the
> recommendation by the International
> Commission on "Iodine-131 is highly toxic to young
> children, increasing the
> risk of thyroid cancer even at low doses"
> Radiological Protection to keep
> radiation exposure "as low as reasonably
> achievable". For countries in the
> European Union, it would also be a breach of a 1997
> directive protecting
> people against the dangers of medical radiation.
>
>
>
> Keith Baverstock, an expert on radiation and health
> at the University of
> Kuopio in Finland, agrees there is cause for
> concern. "Iodine-131 is highly
> toxic to young children, increasing the risk of
> thyroid cancer even at low
> doses," he says.
>
>
>
> Dan Ash, president of the Royal College of
> Radiologists in the UK, agrees it
> is important to keep radiation doses as low as
> possible. "It is likely that
> some patients will get more than they need," he
> says." But that is better
> than failing to treat the disease, especially when
> there is no proof that
> the treatment causes long-term damage to health. Rob
> Edwards
>
>
>
> Fred Dawson
> New Malden
> Surrey. KT3 5BP
> England
>
> 020 8287 2176
>
>
>
************************************************************************
> 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/
>
=====
+++++++++++++++++++
"The care of human life and happiness . . . is the first and only legitimate object of good government."
Thomas Jefferson
-- John
John Jacobus, MS
Certified Health Physicist
e-mail: crispy_bird@yahoo.com
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search - Find what you.re looking for faster
http://search.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/