[Date Prev][Date Next]
RE: [cdn-nucl-l] Low level radiation and cancer: BAD NEWS
"Online First" - in the left column.
Does anyone know if your responsible organization (or others) will undertake
a credible review of this?
Regards, Jim Muckerheide
From: email@example.com.McMaster.CA on behalf of Dukelow, James S
Sent: Wed 6/29/2005 4:44 PM
To: Andrew Daley; Cdn-Nucl-LISTSERV (E-mail)
Subject: RE: [cdn-nucl-l] Low level radiation and cancer: BAD NEWS
For the "international" study, go to www.bmj.org and click on Online
Publication (or words to that effect).
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
[mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org.McMaster.CA] On Behalf Of Andrew Daley
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 1:29 PM
To: Cdn-Nucl-LISTSERV (E-mail)
Subject: [cdn-nucl-l] Low level radiation and cancer: BAD NEWS
Anybody have a link to the French study? Jerry can you comment on the
validity of this study??
Low-dose radiation poses small cancer risk: report
Last Updated Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:39:56 EDT
CBC News <http://www.cbc.ca/news/credit.html>
There is likely no such thing as a safe level of exposure to radiation,
although cancer is rarely induced by low doses, a panel of U.S. scientists
"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 Monson, the panel's chair and a
professor of epidemiology at Harvard's School of Public Health.
"The health risks - particularly the development of solid cancers in organs -
rise proportionally with exposure."
The panel's report addresses amounts of radiation from medical treatments
such as full-body CT scans. The findings are expected to affect government
safety recommendations in the U.S.
A low dose of 100 millisieverts of radiation - the equivalent of 10 chest
X-rays - is expected to cause solid cancer or leukemia in one out of 100
people over a lifetime, the report said. About half of those cases could be
The panel's report updates research based largely on survivors of the 1945
atomic bomb attacks in Japan.
While medical radiation is often appropriate, "exposure to any unnecessary
radiation should be avoided," Monson told a news conference. "And what is
unnecessary is up to an individual."
Natural sources of radiation such as gamma rays from space and radon in the
environment account for about 82 per cent of our exposure, the report said.
More research is needed on those who receive frequent doses such as full-body
CT scans, and on children who get X-rays or radiation treatment for cancer,
the panel said.
Research on more than 400,000 nuclear industry workers found they had a 10
per cent higher risk of death from cancer, according to a related report
released Wednesday by the International Agency for Research on Cancer in
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around