LONGEVITY IS THE BEST MEASURE OF HEALTH EFFECTS OF RADIATION

1
LONGEVITY IS THE BEST MEASURE OF HEALTH EFFECTS
OF RADIATION
John R. Cameron Professor Emeritus University of
Wisconsin
2

• TRADITIONALLY HEALTH EFFECTS OF IONIZING
  RADIATION HAVE BEEN MEASURED IN TERMS OF CANCER
  INCIDENCE.

3
FROM STATE TO STATE, CANCER VARIES MUCH MORE THAN
LONGEVITY

• MODERATE DOSE RATE RADIATION APPEARS TO
• INCREASE LONGEVITY

4
I PROPOSE THAT THE MOST APPROPRIATE MEASURE OF
THE HEALTH EFFECT OF IONIZING RADIATION IS
LONGEVITY THE MOST CONVINCING HUMAN DATA ARE
FROM THE 100 YEAR DEATH RATES FROM ALL CAUSES OF
BRITISH RADIOLOGISTS (1897-1997) BJR JUNE 2001
5
THERE ARE MILLIONS OF RADIATION WORKERS IN THE
WORLD. THE WORKERS WITH THE GREATEST OCCUPATIONAL
DOSES WERE RADIOLOGISTS.IF RADIOLOGISTS HAVE
INCREASED LONGEVITY, SHOULD OTHER RADIATION
WORKERS WORRY?
6
The best radiation health study ever
publishedBerrington, A, Darby, SC, Weiss, HA,
Doll, R. 100 years of observation on British
radiologists mortality from cancer and other
causes 1897-1997 Br J Radiol. 74, 507-519 (2001)

7
The authors did not mention the good news in
their study There was no evidence of an effect
of radiation on diseases other than cancer even
in the earliest radiologists, despite the fact
that doses of the size received by them have been
associated with more than a doubling in the death
rate.
8
MY ARTICLE IN THE JULY 2002 ISSUE OF BJR POINTS
OUT THAT Radiation Increased the longevity of
British radiologists. Br J Radiol 200275637-8.
9
BRITISH RADIOLOGIST STUDY

• Divided radiologists in to four groups
• 1. 1897- 1921 huge doses
• 2. 1921-1935 more careful.
• 3..1936-1954 better yet
• 4. 1955-1979 about 5mGy/y

10
Radiologists deaths from cancer and non-cancer
were compared to that of all male MDs in England
11

• Before 1921, radiologists had 75 more cancer
  deaths (Plt0.001) but deaths from other causes
  were 14 lower (Plt0.05) than for all male MDs.
  Deaths from all causes were 3 lower. (NS)
• Large doses (1 Gy/y) did not shorten longevity.

12
In 1920 British radiologists formed a x-ray
safety committee to reduce occupational
radiation. The results were beneficial as the
following data indicate.
13
After 1920 no group of radiologists had a cancer
death rate significantly greater than their
medical colleagues.
14
The abrupt drop from plt0.001 to NS suggests that
the radiation induction of cancer has a
significant threshold as shown by Evans 1974
study of radium dial painters the
Rossi-Zaiders 1997 study of lung cancer.
15
The1955-1979 British Radiologists had 29 lower
cancer deaths (NS) 36 lower non-cancer deaths
(Plt0.001) and 32 lower deaths (Plt0.001) from all
causes than the controls
16
Their lower death rate from all causes increased
their longevity by over three years! If all
cancer were curable in the U.S., the longevity
would only increase 3 years !
17

• FOR THE 100 YEARS, THE RADIOLOGISTS DEATHS FROM
  NON-CANCER WAS 14 LOWER (Plt0.001) THEIR DEATH
  RATE FROM ALL CAUSES WAS 8 LOWER (Plt0.01) THAN
  FOR ALL MALE MDs IN ENGLAND AND WALES.

18
The British radiologist study suggests that
moderate dose rate radiation increases longevity.

19
we need a double blind human radiation study to
test the hypothesis that increased radiation
stimulates the immune system.
20
Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama have a 25
higher cancer death rate than Wyoming, Idaho, and
New Mexico, even though background in the
Mountain States is three times higher than in the
Gulf States.
21
In Ramsar, Iran some people have a background of
over 200 mGy/y. They have no apparent increase in
cancer.
22
This suggests that it is ethical to increase the
background of senior citizens in the Gulf States
to about 10 mGy/y
23
I propose a double blind human study of senior
citizens in the Gulf States to see if a dose rate
of 10 mGy/y will increase their longevity.
24
Proposed research

• Boxes of NORM under the beds of 50 of the
  volunteers (the cohort) will raise their
  background radiation to 10 mGy/y

25
The other 50 of the volunteers (the controls)
will have identical boxes of inert material such
as sand. Neither the volunteers nor their medical
care givers will know who is receiving increased
background.
26

• The study will be relatively inexpensive no
  special medical procedures will be needed.
• Data on cause of death along with information on
  infections will be recorded.
• The study will be done in large retirement homes
  where new volunteers will be available.

27
If increased radiation is beneficial, further
studies will be needed to determine the
recommended annual dose (RAD)
28
Caratero A et al Effect of gamma radiation on
the life span of mice. 1998 Faculte de
Medecine, Toulouse, France The life span of mice
exposed to 7 or 14 cGy/year were compared to
controls. 900 female mice, 1 month old, were
used 300 mice in each group living in the same
room. life span was survival time of 50
Results controls 549 days, both irradiated
groups 22 greater.
29
Some advantages of this study

• Many senior citizens will be willing to
  participate in the study It will not involve
  medication or injections and it might prolong
  their lives.

30
POSITIVE RESULTS WOULD HAVE A HUGE IMPACT ON THE
WORLD

• It would improve health.
• It would reduce radiation phobia
• permit more use of nuclear power
• save billions now wasted in storing low level
  radioactive waste
• High level radioactive waste could be mixed with
  concrete in buildings to increase background to a
  healthy level.

31
Some closing words from Dr. Lauriston Taylor,
Founder in 1929 of the NCRP, in 1980 he wrote

32

• No one has been identifiably injured by
  radiation while working within the first
  numerical standards set by the NCRP and the ICRP
  in 1934 (25-50 rads/y)

33
The theories about people being injured have
still not led to the demonstration of injury
and, if considered as facts by some, must only
be looked upon as figments of the imagination.
34

• Virtual Radiation Museum http//www.medphysics.wis
  c.edu/vrm
• RADIATION DISCUSSION ROOMS
• 1. Risks of low dose rate radiation
• 2. Radiation Protection Quantities
• 3. As Low As Reasonably Achievable
• Dose levels to workers
• 5. How to reduce radiation phobia.
• 6. Critique of NCRP Report on LNT
• 7. Health effects of Radon

35
The management of the RDRs will be an Editor in
Chief assisted by many room editors. In addition
there will 10-15 Honorary Editors from around the
World to advise the Editor in Chief. The RDRs
are intended as archived scientific discussions
of radiation topics.
36
Each RDR will have 3 or more room editors to
filter contributions. The room editors should
represent different view points on the subject.
Contributions must be like scientific articles,
with references where appropriate
37
The room editors will elect the Editor in Chief
who will serve a single three year term. I hope
the first election will take place at the end of
2003. I will serve as the acting Editor in
Chief. This scheme will require cooperation from
various groups, including ICRP NCRP
38
I dont know all the answers but I know that low
dose rate radiation is not a risk and may be
beneficial.SEND ME QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
ANYTIME JRCAMERO_at_WISC.EDUBEST WISHES, JOHN