To Be or Not To Be

["J. J. Rozental" <josrozen@netmedia.net.il>]

Sandy Perle list inform:

Thai atomic agency says radioactive gems not dangerous

   BANGKOK, Nov 14 (AFP) - Thai atomic energy officials said Friday that
radioactive gems reportedly circulating in Asian markets were not dangerous
as their radiation levels were "natural."
   "We do not think that stones with the reported level of radiation that we
have seen are dangerous to society," Manoon Aramrattana, deputy
secretary-general of the Office of Atomic Energy for Peace, told AFP.
   He said some "cats' eyes" stones tested in Bangkok were said to have
shown radiation levels of 52 nanoCuries, but insisted such a level posed no
peril.
    "We are not concerned that this could pose a danger to people  as
the levels of radioactivty are natural. Radioactivity can be natural
depending from where the stone is mined," he said.
   He added that his state agency had not received any "complaints  or seen
any evidence to suggest that radioactive stones were on the market."
   "We have not been given an executive order to investigate these reports,
but are confident there is no major problem," he said.
    The comments followed reports that hundreds of dangerously radioactive
gemsetones were on Asian markets and some had ended up in pieces of
jewellery after undergoing irradiation to enhance their natural colour.
   Medical experts reportedly warned that the "nuclear" gems could destroy
white blood cells and cause cancer of the skin.
   Manoon appealed to anyone in Thailand, a world centre of the gemstone
trade, who suspected they might have a radiocative stone in their possesion
to bring it to his agency for testing.
   "The news has spread very far and must be making a lot of people very
nervous indeed, but there have been no reports of illness relating to these
stones," he said.
   The department of mineral resources also said the levels of radiation
were not dangerous as the radiation type used on stones was gamma radiation
which "disappeared very quickly."
   The department said that while the Asian radiation safety level was
2.0 nanoCuries and some stones had reportedly been tested a 52, gamma rays
were not dangerous.
   But Ken Scarrat of Bangkok's Centre for Gemstone Testing said  his
laboratory had identified "cats eyes," chocolate brown stones bearing a
distictive streak through the middle, which had registered abnormal amounts
of radioactivity.
   "This goes back to September when we put out a warning that some cats
eyes were showing signs of radiation well over international limits," he
told AFP.
   "The issue is serious, but we must put it in perspective and remember
that the number of cats eyes sold around the world compared to diamonds
rubies and emeralds is a mere pinprick."
   The stones, which can fetch tens of thousands of dollars depending on
their size and colour, are particularly popular in Asia, notably Indonesia
and Japan, he said.
   He said some stones were "being irradiated and released illegally" onto
the markets by unscrupulous dealers who had used the accepted method of
colour enhancement by irradiation.   But they had failed to allow the stones
to sit for around two years until "radioactivity had decayed to a normal
level" which would allow the stones to be sold safely, provided it was
specified at sale that
they were irradiated.
   He said that "all the evidence we have, although circumstantial, pointed
to Indonesia" as the origin of the stones which have ended up as far afield
as in Japan.
   He said he had learned that "box loads" of radioactive cats'  eyes had
passed through laboratories in Jakarta in recent months pointing to the fact
that the stones were irradiated there.
=================================================
RADSAFERS. MY COMMENTARY ABOUT THIS

The main question with this subject is about the justification of this practice:
For justification one can understand "No practice or source within a
practice should be authorized unless  the practice produces sufficient
benefit to the exposed individuals or to society to offset the radiation
harm that it might cause; that is:  the practice is justified, taking into
account social, economic and other relevant factors"

The above statement should be applied to all possible consumer products
containing radioactive substances, specifically to those producing:

a) Higher  benefit -- Category I (all products specifically designed to
prevent injury to people and practices involving such products, e.g., smoke
detector, timepieces and luminous signal)

b) Lower benefit -- Category II (all other justified products) and
practices, e.g., lightening conductor

By the year 90 was proposed to the IAEA The Code of  Practice on Regulatory
Control of Consumer Products Containing Radioactive Substances. In this
document was considered that the value 100 Bq/g (CEC),  (~ 2 nCi/g) was too
high to be considered   as being of no regulatory concern for some consumer
products, particularly those which may be used close to the body for up to
24 hours a day (e.g. Activity concentration of the luminous paint in a
watch). For these cases much less value was recommended to  be used, as a
value between 1 to 10 Bq/g, depending of the radioactive substance.   
In case of gemstones that have been irradiated by neutrons, today, even the
lower benefit can not be applied since gemstones is an article for personal
adornment. As a matter of fact, how can a  Regulatory Authority,  after
justifying the practice in the country, considering the concept of lower
benefit, to ensure that quality assurance programmes is set up to check that
released stones are below the level of radioactivity that is of no
regulatory concern? -- Or such gemstones are  not exported to countries that
not justify such practices?

J. J. Rozental <josrozen@netmedia.net.il>

	
P.S 
 The Society of Mineral Museum made an issue on this subject at:
http://www.deepcove.com/cig/lab87.html