Risk Comparisons

["Sue M. Dupre" <DUPRE%PUCC.bitnet@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu>]

Good afternoon!  I occasionally see comments on RADSAFE that it doesn't work
to compare the risks of cigarette smoking and radiation exposure.  I've pre-
sumed that this is because the public puts different weight on risks that are
willfully assumed (e.g., smoking) as compared to risks that are seen as
imposed on them (e.g., radiation exposure in some circumstances).  Am I
correct in believing this is why these two risks should not be compared?  Or
are there also other factors I haven't considered?

Assuming that the only problem is the voluntary vs. involuntary nature of the
risks being compared, I think it's reasonable to compare cigarette risks and
radiation risks in at least one circumstance:  I understand that the risk of
adverse effects from smoking one cigarette in a lifetime is approximately
equal to the risk of adverse effects from 10 mrem radiation exposure (using,
of course, the current LNT model).  I think the typical layperson understands
that, while the risks of a lifetime of smoking are considerable, the risk of
smoking a single cigarette, is essentially nonexistent.  If so, I think the
comparison to a single cigarette is really very useful in helping people to
understand very small risks.

Regards,
Sue Dupre/Health Physicist/Princeton University
dupre@princeton.edu