Re: X-ray scanning for thefts

[Christian Schoenhofer <schoenho@via.at>]

Schoenhofer
Habichergasse 31/7
A-1160 Wien
AUSTRIA
Tel./Fax: +43-1-4955308
Mobiltel.: +43-664-3380333
e-mail: schoenho@via.at

----------
> Von: Douglas.Minnema@dp.doe.gov
> An: Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
> Betreff: X-ray scanning for thefts
> Datum: Dienstag, 30. September 1997 16:42
> 
>     
>     
>     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. 

We do not have any disagreement, because I understood well, that you did
not recommend the practice, but that you put forward some thoughts which
were worth discussing.

>     
>     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.

Sometimes opinions are not changed officially, because they are overcome by
other recommendations. In the case of hijacking I think to remember that in
1971 there were no x-ray machines for luggage yet used at airports and also
the search for metal objects was not so easy. Please correct me if I am
wrong. Since the detection methods have changed, a practice like x-raying
passengers is likely not to be necessary even in extreme cases. 

>     
>     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?
>
My arguments were directed to the deliberate irradiation of persons for
other reasons than medical ones, which would not give them any benefit. I
cannot imagine any benefit for society from deliberate irradiation of
persons. It may be a "byproduct" from beneficial practices - like you
mentioned above power generation, medical doctors doing surgery with help
of x-rays etc. 

The diamond search with x-rays - how low the doses might be - is in sharp
contrast to the ALARA principle.

Regards,

Franz