Re[2]: One last comment on Irradiation

[BRZGV@ccmail.ceco.com]

     I'm not sure I understand the current thoughts on risk.  The current 
     options permit people to die.  What is a few mrem/yr to an irradiator 
     worker?  Even if an irradiator worker died every month due to 
     over-exposure, this would certainly be far less than those who 
     currently die needlessly from contaminated food stuffs.
     
     Glen Vickers
     brzgv@ccmail.ceco.com


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: RE: One last comment on Irradiation
Author:  radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu at INTERNET
Date:    12/17/96 7:51 AM


     
     
Dear all,
     
May I remind you of the internationally recommended basic principles of 
radiation protection.
In particular the justification of a practice, briefly:
     
"A practice that entails or that could entail exposure to radiation should 
only be adopted if it yields sufficient benefit to exposed individuals or to 
society to outweigh the radiation detriment it causes or could cause".
IAEA - SS n. 115,  1994
     
This principle shall be taken into account by the national regulatory bodies 
to authorize a practice  that entails or that could entail exposure to 
radiation.
     
In other words, although food irradiation has a lot of known advantages, 
RADIATION SAFETY  has to be considered always. The practice should be 
adopted if it is suitable and there is no other "non-radioactive" option 
available.
     
Patricia Wieland
IAEA
e-mail: wieland@nepo1.iaea.or.at
     
     
 ----------
From: radsafe
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: One last comment on Irradiation 
Date: Tuesday, 17. December 1996 06:50
     
X-Comment:  Radiation Safety Distribution List
     
     I personally hope we can close out this thread pretty soon.  I think 
     we've reached the point of diminishing returns.  However, there still 
     appears to be a miscommunication that I hope I capture here, in that 
     Herr Franzhoeffer discusses the issue of whether foodstuffs ought to 
     be irradiated in the first place, and whether ALL foodstuffs should be 
     REQUIRED to be irradiated, while many of the rest of us appear to 
     operate on the basic premise that the decision WHETHER to irradiate 
     should be a strictly commercial or private decision, with the 
     additional proviso that anyone who doesn't want to eat the stuff 
     doesn't have to, because there are plenty of options and one should be 
     ALLOWED to act independently of the government insofar as it is 
     possible to do so.  This debate is, I believe, better suited to a 
     discussion of national and political freedoms, rather than radiation 
     safety.
     
     I promise to climb off my soapbox now.
     
     V/R
     George Cicotte
     george_cicotte@health.ohio.gov