• Thank you for visiting the Cafe Rad Lab Forum
  • We present & discuss radiation health, science & news
  • To keep you informed about vital nuke information.
Hello There, Guest! Login Register


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Radiation study suggests even low levels can be deadly over long term
#1
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/se...clnk&gl=us

Interesting article.  Would need to see the data and how they handled it.
"All models are flawed, some are useful."
George E. P. Box
 
Reply
#2
Can't read article without registering apparently.

Published 20 Oct 2015 Risk of cancer from occupational exposure to ionising radiation: retrospective cohort study of workers in France, the United Kingdom, and the United States (INWORKS) http://www.bmj.com/content/351/bmj.h5359

Mining Awareness picks up:

Nuclear Worker Study Affirms that Low Doses of Radiation are Deadly https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/20...-believed/

From the study above:

"Methods

International consortium

INWORKS was established to provide a basis for deriving more precise quantitative estimates of the risk of chronic, low level, exposure to ionising radiation. To be included, workers must have been employed in the nuclear industry for at least one year and monitored for external radiation exposure through the use of personal dosimeters. From France, data were obtained from three major employers: Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique, AREVA Nuclear Cycle, and Electricité de France.4 From the UK, data were obtained through the National Registry for Radiation Workers, which includes information provided by major employers of nuclear workers including the Atomic Weapons Establishment, British Nuclear Fuels, UK Atomic Energy Authority, British Energy Generation, Magnox Electric, and the Ministry of Defence, among others.5 From the USA, data were obtained from the US Department of Energy’s Hanford site, Savannah River site, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and Idaho National Laboratory, as well as from the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.6

In France, as required by the French Data Protection Authority, workers were given the opportunity to refuse participation; however, none did. In the USA, worker information was taken from existing records, with no direct contact with any participants; because there is minimal risk to participants, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health institutional review board waived requirements for informed consent. UK workers can refuse to participate in the National Registry for Radiation Workers and associated studies; less than 1% refused.

Dosimetric data
Personal monitoring data for occupational exposure to ionising radiation were available from company records for UK workers and government and company records for US and French workers, providing individual annual quantitative estimates of whole body dose due to external exposure to penetrating radiation in the form of photons.14 Unless otherwise stated, any reference to dose in this paper implies absorbed dose to the colon expressed in grays (Gy).

These analyses use estimated colon dose to facilitate comparison with other recent major analyses of associations between radiation dose and solid cancer mortality.3 15 Under most working conditions, absorbed doses from external exposures were due to photons of energies between 100 and 3000 kiloelectron volts (1.6e-14 J and 4.8e-13 J, respectively), with a radiation weighting factor of 1. Thus, estimates of absorbed dose in Gy could well be expressed in terms of equivalent dose in sievert (Sv) with similar numerical values.

We used available records of estimated neutron doses, which were recorded in a unit of measure for equivalent dose (that is, rem or Sv), only to construct categories of neutron monitoring status: whether a worker had a positive recorded neutron dose, and if so, whether their recorded neutron dose ever exceeded 10% of their total external radiation dose of record.14 16 We did not add recorded estimates of doses from tritium intakes to recorded estimates of dose due to external exposures.

Available measures of incorporated radionuclides were varied and included positive bioassay results, indication of confirmed uptake (for example, fraction of a body burden or annual limit on intake), or an assigned committed dose. For our purposes, we grouped these measures as an indication of a known or suspected internal contamination. French and US workers with a known or suspected uptake were identified, as were UK workers who were known to have been monitored for internal exposure."
Pia
just pm me if needed.
 
Reply
  


Forum Jump:


Browsing: 1 Guest(s)