RE: Just what is safe -Reply

[Michael S Ford <MFORD@pantex.com>]

Keith, a brief reply and I'll let you judge for yourself....

>>> Keith Welch wrote on Thu 11 Feb 99  12:07 >>>

Can't resist playing the devil's advocate on this ....

...I'll take this as an assertion that you believe 500 mrem/yr is safe....

... Now I ask, would you just as off-handedly dismiss 1 rem/y, or 3
rem/y or 5 rem/y as causing "no injury"?...

... It's all within the allowed limits.   A lifetime dose of 100 rem surely
has "some" risk associated with it, thereby causing "some" injury....

This is really what it comes down to - you have your own perception
about what is safe, and I have mine; A consensus ( that the public
will buy into) is necessary. But I don't think it's a fair representation
to say, "radiography accidents are injurious, routine occupational
exposure is not"; A person should not have to develop ARS for us to
classify them as being injured by radiation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

To start with the last statement first, I would by and large consider
occupational exposures within the legal limits to be inherently safe. 
And rad workers are generally safer and healthier in their work
places than just about any other industrial sector.  

I would not discount, however, the genetic outlier individual that is
hyper-radiosensitive.  But "safe" does not mean "without risk".  Safe
means "acceptable risk".  Example:  it may be safe to cross the
street, but if you fall down when you're crossing, you might get run
over.  But you accept the risk and move on.

As for the higher annual doses you noted... consider the annual
background levels in the countries below:

Norway, approx. 0.49 rem/yr  (70 yrs =  34 rem lifetime)

Some regions in India 2.7 rem/yr (190 rem lifetime)

Iran country average of 4 rem/yr (280 rem lifetime)

A house in Ramsar, Iran - 23 rem/yr - occupants have no elevated
disease rates and some have lived to 110 yrs (1610 rem lifetime).

How is it possible that humans have survived through the millennia
only to be snuffed out of existence by the LNTH?  Is the EPA or NRC
planning to evacuate these countries?  Wouldn't it seem silly to limit
occupational exposures to 1 rem annual in Iran when they're getting
4 rem from background?

(rhetorical questions all)
v/r
Michael
mford@pantex.com
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html