Radiation Hormesis

[BYRPV@ccmail.ceco.com]

The ANS has taken the lead in accumulating information that refutes the 
linear no-threshold hypothesis (LH) relating ionizing radiation dose to 
cancer induction. If you can get Nuclear News of two or three months 
ago, there is an excellent article by Jim Muckerheide that summarizes 
some of the current data. Also, the Health Physics Society Newsletter, 
June, 1995 issue, had 22 letters to the editor on the subject.
     
It appears that the LH is not correct at low doses. Not only may low 
doses NOT be harmful, they may even be beneficial. Dr. Luckey has 
written two books about radiation hormesis. There are about 3500 
citations to reports of data demonstrating hormesis in those books.
     
The November, 1995 issue of Nuclear News has a book report of a book 
titled: "Has Radiation Protection Become a Health Hazard?"
     
So, you may be right. We may actually be hurting radiation workers by 
insisting that their doses be far below 5 rem per year TEDE.
     
The real problem will be, if we raise the radiation protection standard, 
how to keep radioactive material out of industries for which radioactive 
material would be a problem. Photographic film manufacturers wouldn't 
like radioactive material all over their production facilities. Same for 
computer chip makers. Same for research laboratories. Etc., etc. Do we 
put the onus on those people to ensure their facilities and materials 
are radioactive material free? I don't think so. So -- we must still 
control radioactive material so it is confined to well known, small 
areas. But -- we can save billions of dollars in useless studies, 
environmental impact statements, legal fees, etc. etc. if the public and 
radiation workers know that a little radiation is GOOD for you and the 
yearlylimit for everyone is 5 rem. Have a happy thanksgiving.

     Al Tschaeche
     <XAT@inel.gov>
     

ighted 
>     if everyone understood the true risks of exposure to radiation.  Then 
>     perhaps nuclear power could return to being the affordable, 
>     environmentally friendly industry it was supposed to be.
     
er... Don't you all have to close the fuel cycle first?  I wish you could!
     
In some people's eyes, the nuclear industry will never be "environmentally 
friendly."  It's paranoia about possible plutonium diversion into nuclear 
weapons.  All the nuclear industry has to do is prove it could never happen....
     
Have a great Thanksgiving.  Gonna shut down the plant and give all the staff 
a holiday?
     
Just kidding.  Your efforts are much appreciated! 
Albert Lee Vest           The Ohio State University 
Health Physicist    Room 103 1314 Kinnear Road Bldg 
(614)292-1284                     1314 Kinnear Road 
avest@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu   Columbus OH 43212 
My employer did not review or approve this message.