(338.3376) WISE Amsterdam - Since then, the Standing Conference has grown stronger. And, once again, the high calibre of speakers and workshop conveners at this year's meeting, held 7 and 8 July in Bangor, Wales, gave campaigners a chance to meet scientists and professionals working in the field.
In addition to coverage of the three landmark reports released over the last year - i.e., the 5th report of the US Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation Committee (BEIR 5), the draft recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), and the Gardner report - the conference topics included coverage of Dr. Patricia Sheehan's evidence pointing to a connection between the high incidence of Downs Syndrome births and the October 1957 Windscale fire. All of these have been reported on previously in the WISE News Communique.
Some of the information presented at the conference which we have not previously reported on include:
- A reminder from Dr. Bogus Zaba from Bangor University in Wales that the radiation doses caused by the Sellafield discharges, and covered In the Gardner report, may be much higher than we think, because the models of the environmental pathways which carry radiation back to humans are wrong. Models of cesium movement in soil, post-Chernobyl, for instance, were wrong, casting doubt on other environmental models.
Any model will have many areas of uncertainty including unreported discharges, actinide resuspension, human behavior, dietary habits and metabolism. - The discovery by Dr. Ian Gill, from the Genetics Department at Liverpool University, of major chromosomal re-arrangements at a very low frequency in sheep with recorded becquerel counts of up to 3,500 Bq. Although results so far are by no means statistically significant, they indicate that the number of chromosome gaps fall as levels of radiation recorded rise. If the radiation has caused damaged chromosomes to repair more quickly, then, says Gill, further studies might help to support the theory that a little radiation is good for you. This theory - "hormesis", or the idea that there is a positive net benefit for human health from low-dose exposure - is challenged by Dr. John Gofman in his book "Radiation-Induced Cancer from Low Dose Exposure" (see following article). And, as Pete Roche says in his article about the conference in SCRAM, it is very difficult to say what other consequences repairing these gaps might have.
- A talk by David Sumner of the Department of Nuclear Medicine at Stobhill General Hospital in Glasgow. Among other things, Dr. Sumner said that while improved techniques could reduce medical exposure, the use of certain types of equipment can also help. For example, in Italy all X-ray machines are fitted with 'rare earth screens'. They can cut doses at a maximum cost of UK 40 pounds per person Sv. Carbon fiber couches or table tops can cut the average dose by 50%, because they absorb less X-rays, so a lower dose can be used. A third method of reducing doses is, of course, to cut out unnecessary X-rays.
- Details of the work of the Scottish Universities Research and Reactor Centre (SURRC) given by Dr. Bill East, Head of Health Physics and Nuclear Medicine there, on the high incidence of leukaemia and Central Nervous System tumors around the Capper Pass Smelting Plant on the Humber Estuary in England. (See in brief, "Tin and Radiation", this issue.)
- A study by Dr. Denis Henshaw from Bristol University on the international incidence of myeloid leukemia and radon concentration in homes in 14 countries.
- A report by Jack Dromey, National Secretary of the Transport and General Workers Union, on the change in workers' attitudes since the release of the Gardner report. Dromey gave examples of what can be done to lower safety risks to workers. He also said that the British unions are arguing for the compensation scheme to be extended to the children of nuclear workers.
The conference ended with a call from Patrick Green, Friend of the Earth's radiation campaigner, for support for the campaign to stop the new ICRP recommendations from being incorporated in UK legislation. In addition to the trades unions, the 170 nuclear free local authorities have already joined the campaign, but, says Green, more local campaigns are needed. Any new legislation will be in place for at least 10 years, so, he points out, it is important to get it right now. His organization wants emergency legislation brought before the UK parliament to enforce a 10 mSv per year dose limit, with strict collective dose limits set to ensure that reductions in individual risk do not cause collective risk to increase. In five years time, FoE wants the 10 mSv limit to be further reduced to 5 mSv. The group also wants the site specific public dose to be reduced immediately to 0.2 mSv.
Sources: SCRAM Safe Energy Journal (Scotland), Aug/Sep 1990, p.20
Contact: 6th Standing Conference on Low-Level Radiation and Health, Deilwen Evans, Cae'n Defn, Trawsfynydd, Wales.
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |