Re: justification of practices- part 2

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

At 07:17 AM 2/16/99 -0600, you wrote:
>Dear radsafers,
>
>On Februari 1ste, I posted a message referring to a project in the
>Netherlands about the justification of practices. I asked to share
>with us your knowledge about this rather complex radiation protection
>principle.
>
>Until now I received one (1) question and zero (0) comments. To
>increase the chance of getting a number of valuable contributions I
>restrict my former message now to the jusfication of medical
>applications. I do hope that this more specific question does
>encourage you to response. For ease of reading my former message has
>been added below.
>
>
>Thanks
>
>Pierre J.H. Kicken, PhD
>Senior Health Physicist
>University Hospital Rotterdam,
>Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands.


Dear Pierre,

	Your question on justification, sent to both RADSAFER LISTS, USA and
EUROPE, no doubt, considering the way that you wrote the second message,
brought in your mind a disconcerted surprise: -- Why so important task was
not commented by no one member of these Lists? 
It is curiosity since many subjects discussing in RADSAFER USA, at this
moment,  are directly related with justification, examples: Justification
for certain products on Food Irradiation, justification for neutron gemstone
irradiation, justification for use of coal fly ash in building materials,
justification for use recycled materials from the dismantling of nuclear
installations.  On the other and, of coarse, the Scandinavian justification,
if so will be the case, after the moratorium for continue use of Power Reactor.

What I mean with the above statement is purely the principle of
justification applied for practices, not justification for intervention
"Any proposed Intervention shall do more good than harm"

	I do believe  that the best International document  presenting the
principles of protection and safety, is the IAEA Safety Series 120 --
Radiation Protection and the Safety of Radiation Sources, 1996. Your
question,  Justification of Practices is the first principle among eleven in
that document, defining the principles of protection and safety for decision
makers in technical and policy matters.

GO TO page 6

4.2, ... "Decisions on justification are largely influenced by broader
political, economic and social concerns" -- Example:  Countries that have no
restriction to gemstones neutron irradiated, specially to export;

4.3 Dealing with practices not justified (above example)

4.4 Dealing  with respect  of activities resulted  of a justified practice,
examples waste and transport 

4.5 Going now to your main direction, in this second part of your question
-- justification of medical application --
"Medical exposures shall be justified by weighing the diagnostic or
therapeutic benefits they are expected to produce against the radiation
detriment they might cause, with account taken of the benefits and risk of
available alternative techniques that do not involve medical exposure"

Concerning 4.2: "Decisions on justification are largely influenced by
broader political, economic and social concerns" the topic reminds me Bo
Lindell (Swedish Radiation Protection Institute)
"Whether a practice or a situation is acceptable or not (to somebody)
depends on the balance of advantages and disadvantages..." ...
"Decision-maker is influenced by the same factors, but does not always share
them with those exposed the risk"



Best Regards,

J. J. Rozental
josrozen@netmedia.net.il
Israel

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