Re: Cancers defined as "radiogenic diseases"

[Bob Hearn <rah@america.net>]

While the fact that prostate cancer has not been shown to be a result of
radiation exposure is certainly germane to this action, let's not overlook
the point of broader significance that, because radiation has been
associated with the occurrence of some cancers, they should be labeled as
radiation phenomena. This is somewhat akin to calling any puncture in which
a foreign object enters the body through impact and penetration (be it a
slug, knife, scalpel, hypodermic needle, etc.) a "gunshot wound" and
awarding a purple heart and other benefits, despite that the vast majority
of such occurrences are not associated with projectiles (much less
firearms), and many, if not most, are associated with the receipt of some
benefit (medical procedures). This Orwellian mis-speak must be eliminated or
we will all suffer from the result of skewing of risk-based decisions and
policies due to political or other selfish motivations, not to mention the
redistribution of our tax dollars.

Bob Hearn
Unaffiliated
No disclaimers

At 07:34 AM 10/22/96 -0500, you wrote:
>Dr. Kenneth Mossman had a very interesting lecture this past summer at the
>1996 HPS Summer School, "Applications of New Technology: External
>Dosimetry."  In Dr. Mossman's section of the textbook and in the lecture, he
>mentioned several cancers that apparently could NOT be induced by radiation.
>Note, he does not say low sensitivity, but NO sensitivity.  They are:
>chronic lymphatic leukemia, Hodgkin's disease, and cancers of the prostate,
>uterus, cervix, testis, mesothelium, mesentary.  He also indicated with
>humor (but I'm sure he was right) that whoever could identify the reason for
>these tissues' apparent total lack of radiosensitivity could win a Nobel.
>
>If Dr. Mossman is on this list, maybe he can expound a little.  And perhaps
>he could lend a hand to the VA (not that I'm volunteering him).
>
>At 11:23 PM 10/21/96 -0500, you wrote:
>> The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has announced in the Federal
>> Register (FR) a proposed rule that would define prostate and ANY other cancer
>> as "radiogenic diseases". This would seem to set a precedent for future legal
>> actions involving exposure to radiation. The text of the FR notice is
included
>> below. Any comments?
>
>Scott O. Schwahn, CHP
>Jefferson Lab, M.S. 12A1
>12000 Jefferson Avenue
>Newport News, VA 23606
>(757)269-7551 (w)
>(757)269-7363 (fax)
>schwahn@jlab.org
>
>
>