Re: radiopharmaceutical patient release

[xat@inel.gov (Alden Tschaeche)]

Stephane Jeanfrancois wrote:

Stephane, thanks for your thoughts.  I respond, not to you directly, but
to all radsafers.  You have enunciated ideas that, in my mind, need
further discussion.

> you wrote: Here we go again!  Yes, I would not mind at all sitting next
> to someone
> who received 150 mCi of I-131 a few hours earlier, even if the seat were
> on an airplane and the flight were a 14 hr. flight.  The little exposure
> I would get from such a person is not a problem to me, nor should it be
> to anyone, even a pregnant woman or a baby.
> 
> Al Tschaeche  xat@inel.gov

> You are right, we should not be too worry about this issue. But I try,
> as much as possible, to think ALARA and if there is a way to educate a
> patient to wait for a while after a Thyroid treatment (ablation or
> other), I would do it. 

If there really is a threshold for radiation harm, why do ALARA below
that threshold?  Maybe the operative word here is "too."  I don't think
we should be worried about the issue at all.  So, if not to worry, why
do ALARA?  Sounds like we still think a little radiation is harmful. 

> I'm only saying here that education can be at least a way to diminish
> the impression that low radiation is harmful  

Agreed.  But, we must educate ourselves first.  If we continue to
espouse the ALARA idea right down to zero, what are we telling the
public?

<.We always have to remember that we are dealing
> something with persons that may act only with their hart and not their
> reason when they ear about radiation....

We can't ignore the emotional side of the argument.  But, if we continue
to be unsure about radiation effects, the emotion will remain (Actually,
emotion will remain anyway, but we could amiliorate its impact a lot by
being more emphatic about low level radiation not being harmful, in
light of all the other risks to which people are exposed.)

>And of course, some people
> simply don't know better... So I guess it's the debate on education >all over again. 

And those are the ones we can really help understand.

>But we have to be careful when we say "It's OK for me, so
> it's OK for you..."

If we share our experience authentically, they will "get" it so they can
agree or not - their choice.

> So you see, if you don't educate, you can have a hard time
> persuading someone that a 150 mCi treatment will not affect people
> around, especially if you show them with a NaI counter the activity
> detected...

Agreed.  But, just because one can detect radiation doesn't mean that
exposure to that radiation is harmful.  One could easily use the
situation to educate.

Thanks again for providing the opportunity to share my ideas with y'all.
Al Tschaeche xat@inel.gov