X-ray scanning for thefts

[Douglas.Minnema@dp.doe.gov]

    With respect to the passage that I posted yesterday regarding the 
    ICRP opinion, I would like to respond to Mike, Franz, and the rest 
    of you.
    
    Do not misunderstand, I am not endorsing the practice.  I don't 
    think we really have a disagreement here.  Please reconsider the 
    quotation, especially the sentence "The Commission has already 
    recommended that the irradiation of persons for non-medical 
    purposes, such as in anti-crime and customs examinations, is 
    generally to be deprecated."  This is the sentence I had focused 
    on, and agree with.  The Commission had already decided that 
    irradiation of persons in such cases was not acceptable.  The 
    airline passenger situation was considered as an exception, and 
    not the norm.
    
    The quotation of a reference from 1971 is valid for two reasons:  
    first, I know of nothing that has happened between then and now 
    that would cause the Commission to reverse their opinions; and 
    second, it is worth noting that the situation in question had 
    already been considered 26 years ago.  Yes, the world has changed 
    since then, but we must remember the past in our current 
    considerations.
    
    I appreciate Mike's reference to ICRP 60, paragraph 112(a).  
    Justification of a practice requires a net benefit to the 
    individual OR the society.  This implies that the receptor of the 
    benefit is not necessarily the same as the receptor of the 
    detriment.  Because of this, we can justify the irradiation of 
    individuals in the production of power for the society.  On the 
    other hand, what is the benefit to society of reducing theft of 
    diamonds at the mine head?  Also, have we limited the potential 
    benefits to society by restricting the uses of radiation to only 
    medical purposes?
    
    The question regarding who the receptor is (employee vs public) 
    was only meant to recognize that the benefit/detriment ratios will 
    change.  In the case of diamonds, I am still not convinced that 
    the change would be sufficient to produce a net benefit to society 
    - I doubt that the companies would pass the savings on to the 
    customers.
    
    Doug Minnema, CHP
    Defense Programs
    US Dept. of Energy
    <Douglas.Minnema@dp.doe.gov>
    
    what few thoughts i have are truly my own.