Don't shoot the messenger, I saw these in a news service. This first
article is from the Daily Telegraph (British?) and the second is from the
Scotsman. Personally, I prefer the second because I thought that all the
expert agencies (NCRP, ICRP) recommend specifically against applying risk
coefficients from small doses to very large groups of people and calculating
"excess" induced cancers.
Eric Goldin, CHP
<goldinem at songs.sce.com>
Deaths from radiation cancer rising
By Roger Highfield, Science Editor
(Filed: 24/05/2005)
The population's exposure to radiation has increased and will result in
about 100 extra cancer deaths each year, says a study published yesterday.
New medical diagnostic techniques such as computed tomography (CT) scans
have contributed to the rise in an average annual exposure still dominated
by natural sources, the Board of the Health Protection Agency was told
yesterday.
The report by the agency's radiation protection division says the average
annual dose of ionising radiation exposure - including X-rays, neutrons and
alpha rays - has risen to 2.7 millisieverts (mSv) compared with 2.6 mSv in
1999.
Medical uses of radiation account for the largest man-made contribution to
the overall average annual dose, comprising about 15 per cent. But the
estimated resulting rise in deaths of about 100 is more than likely to be
offset by the lives saved by using X-rays in medicine, says Dr Mike Clark,
for the agency.
The report says average exposure caused by non-nuclear industries - such as
phosphates, oil and gas - is greater than from the nuclear. But 84 per cent
of exposure is natural radiation, of which more than 50 per cent is from
radon gas in buildings.
From The Scotsman
CT scans raise average exposure to radiation
EDWARD BLACK
NEW medical scanning techniques and an increase in air travel
are contributing to an increase in the average person's annual
exposure to radiation, a conference in Edinburgh will hear
today.
According to the Health Protection Agency, the average dose of
ionising radiation exposure is 2.7 millisieverts, compared
with 2.6 in 1999.
More frequent medical use of CT scans has contributed to the
rise in exposure. The increasing popularity of air travel has
also played a part, because flying above 35,000ft increases
people's exposure to cosmic rays by 100 times the rate at
ground level.
Eighty-four per cent of radiation exposure is natural - and
more than half of that is caused by radon accumulation within
buildings. This means there are considerable variations in
doses across the country.
However, contrary to public perception, scientists found that
nuclear power stations posed a virtually non-existent risk to
the public.
Sir William Stewart, the chairman of the Health Protection
Agency, said: "For most of us, about 99 per cent of our dose
comes from natural and medical sources. People need to know
these facts."