Re: European Communities and Radiation Exposure of Flight Crews

[Al Tschaeche <antatnsu@pacbell.net>]

Lantz, Michael W(Z59078) wrote:
> 
> It seems to be a simple case of attempting to satisfy a Worker's need
> to know about their individual doses during their occupational hours:
> i.e., dosimetry.   Whether it is low dose or high dose, it is dose
> that flight crews would like to be aware on an individual basis.  No
> one has suggested any incredible cost issues such as ALARA for flight
> crews; like flying at lower altitudes, or shorter schedules and/or
> limits to flight time, or shielding cockpits!!
> 
> So why the attack on people who would simply be interested in
> measuring doses cheaply, especially in the light of old studies that
> showed that they were incurring positive exposure but "less than 500
> mrem per year"?

Usually when one gets data one does something with it.  I am not
interested in the dose I get from a chest X-ray because, once the X-ray
is over, there is nothing I can do with the dose information.  I
received it.   So what?  True, I know that the small dose is meaningless
to my health and safety.  So I don't need to know it.  

The flight attendants and pilots should be educated so that they know
the small doses they get are meaningless to their health and safety and,
therefore, they shouldn't be interested in them.  I have never had a
pilot or flight attendant, when we were discussing radiation doses to
flight crews express any concern about the doses they get.

I do not mean to attack anyone.  Only ideas that create needless fear
and expenditure of resources.

If each member of flight crews is willing to spend their own money to
determine their own doses, who am I to say they shouln't, even if the
expenditure is needless?  People spend a lot of money on needless
things, myself included.

Maybe someone should do a contemporary study so we can say the doses to
flight crews are now less than 1 rem per year and be done with it. 
Seems to me there was an article in JHPS a few years ago that did just
that.  I can't believe that the doses have gone up since then.

My main concern is that people are frightened of something they
shouldn't be.  Low doses do not hurt people and may even be good for
them.  Anyone who tries to scare people into believing that low doses
are harmful is immoral, unethical and probably has an ulterior motive. 
Bottom line.  Al Tschaeche