Re: KLM-flight and Tc-generator

[Al Tschaeche <antatnsu@pacbell.net>]

Wim Passchier wrote:
> If we have bound ourselves to keep doses (far) below 1 mSv, reaching
> a dose level of about 1 mSv implies loss of (quality) control which is, at
> least in principle, a serious matter and should trigger investigation. But
> loosing control fortunately does not always mean running a serious health
> risk. To distinguish these two subjects may be helpful in risk
> communication.

You have hit on a very important distinction.  Somehow the radiation
protection community must make clear that reports of loss of control of
radiaton or radioactive material do not always mean there is a harmful
consequence to anyone.  If doses are always stated for every incident of
loss of control, then one can also make a statement about the health
consequence.  If no dose is included, there is no way to do that. In the
cases recently of the guard uniforms, the I-131, and the contaminated
hospital pipes, no doses were estimated, so no health consequences could
be stated (even though we all know that the health consequenses were
zero, or may have been deleterious because a beneficial dose would have
been withheld).

It is interesting that you say: "IF we have bound ourselves to keep
doses ..."  The word "if" is illuminating.  Hopefully, soon, we will
give up the ALARA idea, the collective dose idea and the no threshold
idea.  None of them represent reality.  

Al Tschaeche antatnsu@pacbell.net