National Academy of Sciences panel: Radiation? There IS no safe/harmless dose...

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by Mel Brennan, Jun 30, 2005.

  1. Mel Brennan

    Mel Brennan PLANITARCHIS' BANE

    Paris Saint Germain
    United States
    Apr 8, 2002
    Baltimore
    Club:
    Paris Saint Germain FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Panel Rejects Nuclear Industry Claim, Affirms Radiation Link to Cancer

    (AP) The preponderance of scientific evidence shows that even very low doses of radiation pose a risk of cancer or other health problems and there is no threshold below which exposure can be viewed as harmless, a panel of prominent scientists concluded Wednesday.

    The finding by the National Academy of Sciences panel is viewed as critical because it is likely to significantly influence what radiation levels government agencies will allow at abandoned nuclear power plants, nuclear weapons production facilities and elsewhere.

    The nuclear industry,, as well as some independent scientists, have argued that there is a threshold of very low level radiation where exposure is not harmful, or possibly even beneficial. They said current risk modeling may exaggerate the health impact.

    The panel, after five years of study, rejected that claim.

    "The scientific research base shows that there is no threshold of exposure below which low levels of ionized radiation can be demonstrated to be harmless or beneficial," said Richard R. Monson, the panel chairman and a professor of epidemiology at Harvard's School of Public Health.

    The committee gave support to the so-called "linear, no threshold" model that is currently the generally acceptable approach to radiation risk assessment. This approach assumes that the health risks from radiation exposure declines as the dose levels decline, but that each unit of radiation — no matter how small — still is assumed to cause cancer.
     
  2. CrewDust

    CrewDust Member

    May 6, 1999
    Columbus, Ohio
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Better not get any X-Rays then.
     
  3. IntheNet

    IntheNet New Member

    Nov 5, 2002
    Northern Virginia
    Club:
    Blackburn Rovers FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States


    So if low doses of radiation pose a cancer risk, then I assume all radiation sources are suspect, not just nuclear; i.e., IR radiation sources (microwaves), cell phones, and other digitial devices, and the largest single cancer source: the sun itself, from tanning, exposure, etc.

    In other words, if what the Panel is saying is correct, why are they limiting their concern to nuclear point sources of radiation, when there are many other sources?
     
  4. Mel Brennan

    Mel Brennan PLANITARCHIS' BANE

    Paris Saint Germain
    United States
    Apr 8, 2002
    Baltimore
    Club:
    Paris Saint Germain FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    They are refuting nuclear industry claims to the contrary...when the microwave industry (smartly ducking this whole thing, and riding that thing for all it's worth) breaks breath to open their mouth, they'll be refuted too.
     
  5. Dr Jay

    Dr Jay BigSoccer Supporter

    Aug 7, 1999
    Newton, MA USA
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    The last phrase is inaccurate....

    It should read " - no matter how small - could potentially cause cancer"


    One photon of ionizing radiation theoretically is all you need to start a cell down a cancerous lineage. Obviously, the more radiation one gets, the more likely cancer is to result. Don't forget two facts: there is quite of bit of "background" radiation around us at all time that provides a constant "risk". Therefore very small radiation doses do not increase risk much over background. And second: all of us (except for kids with SCID) have the ability to repair much of the damage that low doses of ionizing radiation can cause.

    This report seems to me to be no real news.
     

Share This Page