Re: PI with I-131 Treatment and Immedia

[JMUCKERHEIDE@delphi.com]

Re conaminating experiments, I'd agree. But its not the "concern" being
discussed. Al Tschaeche has often noted that there are standards for public
health, and the need for much more rigorous standards for "clean room"
applications. As here. 

Possible contamination of labs is real. Constraints for access are appropriate 
for those conditions only. The "risk" from sitting near a person at 1.3 mr/hr
is not, nor contaminating a toilet, etc. See eg the HPS position statement on
risk. See any applicable biology. This "risk" is fiction - played on the
unknowing. It's unfortunate that HPs do not learn the applicable biology and
the scientific basis for rad health effects assessment. 

This experience itself, like the rock in the NJ school, should be a learning
experience about the falacious basis we have for rad protection standards and
actions. It's especially unfortunate that the pregnant woman is unduly
concerned, and even that there seems to be no one to effectively explain it to 
her.  I hope you will be able to take Ron Amoling's advice to heart and
application, and that the input from many others directly knowledgeable of the 
science is available and helpful. 

Regards, Jim Muckerheide
jmuckerheide@delphi.com

> Radsafers,
> 
> I also disagree for the same reason as indicated 
> below, and it is NOT a hypothetical concern.
> 
> I have seen experiments involving very costly biologicals
> that were based on modest to low counting rates for special
> radio-labeled material completely destroyed by cross
> contamination.  It wasn't documented in the public
> literature (may have made a few RSC minutes), but it
> definitely has reduced the effectiveness of more than one
> PI.  In at least one case, the radionuclide use authorization
> was removed (effectively removing the PI).
> 
> Yes, it likely will not be a significant problem
> regarding radiation protection of individuals (simply
> because you don't have a rush of many Grave's patients
> in the lab at the same time), but it can terminate
> effective research.  A pair of gloves worn while in the
> radionuclide utilization lab is not an unwarranted
> limitation for any reasoning investigator (think reverse
> isolation...and grant protection!).
> 
> Obviously, merely an opinion.
> 
> Yo,
> 
> MikeG.
> 
> At 03:47 PM 6/20/97 -0500, you wrote:
> >I disagree that a PI should be allowed to resume work immediately
> >after having a nuclear medicine treatment,  ESPECIALLY if the PI is
> >returning to a laboratory environment.
> >
> >My main concern would not be the radiation safety of coworkers.  My
> >concern would be the negation of experiments in progress.
> >
> >As many lab instruments are shared between researchers,  there is a
> >strong possiblity of cross contaminating another researchers 
> >experiment.  Most experimental protocols entail months of data ...
> 
> 
> Michael P. Grissom
> Asst Dir (ES&H)
> SLAC
> Phone: (415) 926-2346
> Fax:   (415) 926-3030
> E-mail: mikeg@slac.stanford.edu