Reply - Radiation has widespread effects on cell

["Waddle, Thomas" <thomas.waddle@rfets.gov>]

The following statement has me wondering:

>"The new findings suggest that public health officials may have to 
>alter cancer risk estimates for people who are exposed to low
>levels of radiation via radon and repeated x-rays."

Do new discoveries regarding the damage mechanism affect risk assessments
based on exposure and equivalent biological damage?  Isn't that why we
express dose in terms of equivalent biological damage based on observed
effects, exposure amounts, and statistical analysis?

I noted that these types of statements are generally not attributed to the
scientists who conducted this study, but the evaluations of the writer of
the story.

I believe the following statement by one of the study scientists is a good
example of how the data is best used (as a stepping stone in our
understanding of how radiation causes biological damage and how this damage
may be prevented or reduced in the future):

>``It may turn out there is more damage to the DNA at low doses 
>than previously assumed, but that is something that scientists who 
>make these extrapolations will have to determine,'' said Randers-
>Pehrson. ``It is unclear as yet whether the results imply greater or 
>lesser risk.''

Tom Waddle, Radiological Engineer
RFETS
thomas.waddle@rfets.gov

These ramblings are my very own.
No employer, especially mine, would allow me to speak for them!!
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html