Bad Press on Radioactive Material Security

["Richard, Mack L" <mrichar@iupui.edu>]

Radsafers:

Sorry for the previous message that came out as gibberish.  I guess you
can't attach Word documents to radsafe messages.  Anyway, I copied and
pasted the message I sent to the reporter to the bottom of this message.  My
apologies for its length.  It's hard to educate someone on this issue in 25
words or less.

Regards,
Mack R.

Mack L. Richard, M.S., C.H.P.
Radiation Safety Officer - Indiana Univ. Med. Cntr.
Phone #: (317) 274-0330   Fax #: (317) 274-2332
E-Mail Address:  mrichar@iupui.edu

****************************************************************************
***********************************************************
E-mail message sent to Hank Phillippi Ryan:

Dear Mr. Ryan:

I am the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO) at a large, medical/research
institution and have served in that capacity for more than 20 years.  I have
a Master of Science degree in Health Physics (Health Physics is simply
another term for radiation protection) from Purdue University.  I have been
a member of the Health Physics Society (an international group of radiation
protection professionals) for about 24 years and am a diplomate of the
American Board of Health Physics.  The reason for the aforementioned
information is simply to let you know that I have considerable training and
experience in the radiation protection profession, particularly in the
university/medical environment.

My reason for writing to you is related to your February 10th story on the
security of radioactive materials in hospitals and universities.  I did not
see the story on television; however, I heard about it through a radiation
safety bulletin board on the internet called "radsafe".  I obtained your
station's web site address and read the text of the story.  The story is so
full of sensationalism and inaccuracies it is difficult to know where to
start.

One of the primary inaccuracies which a story like yours propagates is the
unrealistic hazards associated with radiation and radioactive materials.
Radioactive materials are not unlike other hazardous materials in that the
hazard is related to the amount of radioactive material present.  One of
your "experts", a Dr. Thomas Winters stated, "It's harmful if it's allowed
to enter the body."  Such a statement may be true if the amount of
radioactivity allowed to enter the body is large enough.  However, such a
statement cannot be made without quantifying the amount of radioactive
material entering the body.  There is no human evidence to substantiate
claims that small amounts of radioactivity within the body are harmful.
Claims of risk from low levels of radiation are based upon extrapolations
from higher doses.  Such claims have come under extreme scrutiny from the
health physics community.  

It should be noted that with a few exceptions, university researchers use
extremely small quantities of radioactive material in their work.  In most
cases, the amount of radioactivity in many of our research laboratories is
less than the amount of radioactivity administered to a patient undergoing a
diagnostic, nuclear medicine scan.  Many of those patients (and the
radioactivity within their bodies) walk out of the hospital when the scan is
completed.  Furthermore, the radioactive material within the laboratory is
not generally found in one single container or location within the
laboratory.  Rather, it is usually split into a number of different
containers and utilized in various procedures which further reduces the
hazard from any single container.  Thus, the hazard associated with
containers of radioactive materials within research laboratories is
generally very small.

You mentioned incidents at other institutions where radioactive materials
had been utilized to "poison" someone.  You didn't mention what the actual
effects were to the poisoned individuals.  Based upon my recollection of the
reports generated on those incidents, there were no immediate effects due to
the small amount of radioactivity involved.  I also seem to recall that the
potential for long term effects were pretty low.  You also failed to mention
that one of the most highly publicized incidents appeared to result from an
individual who may have had legitimate access to the radioactive material.
Locking up radioactive materials won't prevent such incidents when the
perpetrator has a key!!  

You allude to the fact that the regulatory agencies have not taken
significant actions against institutions where radioactive material security
is lacking.  The reason for that is probably due to the fact that the
regulatory agencies also realize that the real hazards from radioactive
materials are overstated.

Regarding your interviewees, only one of them (Robert Hallisey) is a member
of the Health Physics Society.  I am not familiar with the credentials of
Dr. Thomas Winters or Mr. Matt Wilson.  One would think that individuals who
profess expertise in radiation protection would be affiliated with an
organization whose sole purpose is radiation protection.  I did notice that
Mr. Hallisey was not questioned and/or quoted on the hazard associated with
the security issue.  He basically stated that he had seen an increase in
poisoning incidents with radioactive material and that his inspectors had
found places where radioactive materials were accessible.  Did you ask him
what he thought about the hazards or was that edited out of the story?  I
also noted that while you basically indicted Brown University regarding a
security related poisoning three months ago, you didn't bother to discuss
the incident with the Radiation Safety Officer from that institution.

Let's talk about the best way to poison someone.  This isn't something I've
given a lot of thought to; however, if I were going to do something that
devious, I certainly wouldn't use radioactive material from a hospital or
research lab.  It would be much easier to go to the grocery store and buy
some "Drano" or any number of other poisons available in innumerable other
stores than to steal radioactive material.  IN FACT, ONE OF THE REASONS
PEOPLE DO STEAL RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL FOR THIS PURPOSE IS DUE TO THE FEAR
PROPAGATED BY STORIES SUCH AS YOURS!!  I hope that if someone wants to
poison me, they are stupid enough to use radioactive materials rather than
sulfuric acid available at your local pool supply store.  I'm certainly
willing to accept some ridiculously small increase in cancer risk from the
radiation dose calculated by some statistician when compared to what
sulfuric acid would do to my innards.

The whole point of this discourse is to respectfully ask that you thoroughly
research your topic before you go before the camera and present inaccurate
and sensational information.  It actually provides a disservice to the
viewing public.  Knowing what I know and based upon your report, if I were
one of your viewers, I would have difficulty placing any credibility in past
and future reports you might air.

The aforementioned comments are strictly my own and do not necessarily
represent those of my employer.

Mack L. Richard, M.S., C.H.P.

************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html