[12:21 p.m. Updated I urge you to read Paul Voosen's fine Greenwire article
on radiation risk (mis) perceptions.]
Despite the public focus
on radiation risks, cost has long been the main obstacle to a substantial expansion of nuclear power generation, and will be even more as a result of Japan's still - unfolding effort to secure the wave - ravaged Fukushima Daiichi complex.
Not exact matches
«Cosmic rays are not a significant exposure
risk on the ground,» Eddie Semones, a
radiation health officer at NASA, previously told Business Insider.
I've been known to make things in the microwave instead of
on the stovetop because I'd rather
risk radiation exposure than clean a pot.
Miscarriage occurred in 10.4 percent of the women with the lowest measured exposure level (1st quartile) of magnetic field non-ionizing
radiation on a typical day, and in 24.2 percent of the women with the higher measured exposure level (2nd, 3rd and 4th quartiles), a nearly three times higher relative
risk.
While the Johns Hopkins team studies the likely effects of
radiation on the brain during a deep space mission, other NASA - funded research groups are looking at the potential effects of
radiation on other parts of the body and
on whether it increases cancer
risks.
More research, however, is needed to better characterize those intermediate -
risk patients who can safely be monitored
on a surveillance program,» said D. Andrew Loblaw, MD, a
radiation oncologist at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre in Toronto, Canada.
Geraldine Thomas, a
radiation - health expert at Imperial College London, argues that the report's cancer
risks are likely be overestimates, as its authors openly erred
on the side of caution in various assumptions.
«It is important for healthcare professionals (including referring physicians, radiologists, and technologists) to be aware of
radiation dose levels and
risks from imaging tests for several reasons, including the ability to weigh the
risks and benefits of tests, counsel patients
on relevant
risks, optimize protocols to minimize
radiation dose, and select appropriate protocols to minimize
radiation dose.»
In a related editor's note, JAMA Internal Medicine Editor - in - Chief Rita F. Redberg, M.D., M.Sc., writes: «These findings suggest that the current practice of performing a stress test
on low -
risk patients in the ED is unnecessary and prolongs the length of stay in EDs as well as increases unnecessary medical imaging, with significant associated
radiation risk for tests that include nuclear imaging.
R. S. Sharma, a public health specialist
on the panel from the Indian Council of Medical Research, writes in the report that, «the hot tropical climate of the country, the low body mass index; low fat content of an average Indian as compared to European countries and high environmental concentration of radio frequency
radiation may place Indians under
risk of radio frequency
radiation adverse effect.»
This challenge to the established LNT model and raises questions
on some of the basic assumptions used to assess the
risk of low dose
radiation exposures.
Silver says her lab will try to build such a cell that they can then implant into mammals to detect and report
on the extent of harm caused by UV
radiation, which damages DNA and is a
risk factor in the development of cancer.
Cosmic
radiation presents a major health
risk for astronauts travelling into deep space to set up colonies
on the moon or Mars.
«Our goal is to focus
on approaches that, when properly implemented, will lessen
radiation risks for children with heart disease while still allowing the imaging procedures to be effective.»
The National Radiological Protection Board's advice is based
on a re-evaluation of data
on survivors of the Nagasaki and Hiroshima atom bombs, which estimates that the
risks from
radiation are three times as high as previously thought.
Unfortunately, the
risks associated with screening mammography increased when the team focused
on women with large breasts, who received 2.3 times more
radiation than women with smaller breasts.
They studied mice and found their
risk of mammary cancer from low - dose
radiation depends a great deal
on their genetic makeup.
The project will focus
on improving test particle models to produce SEP forecasts and evaluating the associated
radiation risk.
Any increased exposure to
radiation contributes to a cumulative theoretical lifetime
risk, including flying
on a plane, but the
risk from a single x-ray is miniscule.
Their research led to refinements in therapy that allowed certain patients, based
on specific characteristics, to receive less
radiation or forgo it altogether without increased
risk of recurrence.
Berkeley Lab scientists studied mice and found their
risk of mammary cancer from low - dose
radiation depends a great deal
on their genetic makeup.
The ozone layer is crucial since it blocks out the harmful ultraviolet
radiation from the sun known to increase the
risk of skin cancer and cataract damage, in addition to other harmful effects
on plants and animals.
A typical nuclear medicine procedure may impart a
radiation dose to the patient comparable to about one to four years of natural background
radiation depending
on the type of study.1 As with X-rays, the value of diagnostic imaging is great and the
risks are negligible compared to the health benefits of having the procedure.
NASA's Twins Study has opened up the debate
on health
risks among astronauts, especially in high
radiation zones of deep space.
Interestingly, Patel et al. discovered that while cosmic
radiation represents a significant
risk to the hematopoietic system, there is no dependence
on MMR capacity.
[10] Moreover, patients had a significantly elevated relative
risk of mortality from myocardial infarction, ranging between 7.3 and 8.1, depending
on the length of time since
radiation exposure.
Patients in the at -
risk group were those who developed cancer between 1984 and 1996, consistent with known latency periods of
radiation - induced thyroid cancer, and who lived in at -
risk geographical areas — based
on reported weather patterns — at the time of the accident.
Only in the last decade, when multiple spacefaring nations and corporate entities have announced plans to embark
on manned exploratory missions to Mars and prolonged habitation
on the Moon, has biomedical research been directed towards identifying possible CVD
risks associated with the deep space
radiation environment.
Following lumpectomy alone, a patient typically «has roughly a 30 % to 40 %
risk of breast cancer coming back in the same breast, depending
on the size of the tumor and the histology [grade],» says Dennis E. Hallahan, MD, chairman of the department of
radiation oncology at Vanderbilt University in Nashville.
We have reduced our
risk on RF
radiation but have no control
on those electric posts and fat wires behind our backyard.
This week in MMO crowdfunding, Star Citizen's Around the Verse focused
on the game's stamina system, which touches
on the character's needs and
risks and notifications about them, including «getting drunk, needing to go to the toilet, all the little things that can affect the player temporarily, and then we can expand this to go even to stuff like long - term diseases, depressurization sickness,
radiation sickness — all these things that won't be something the player can get rid of instantly.»
One might expect some clathrate release in the Arctic, perhaps not enough to greatly affect global warming by itself, but add this to the increased thermal energy and methane
radiation already
on the increase in the Arctic and the combination increases
risk.
The news media stigmatize
radiation as a much greater
risk than it is, based
on the biology of what ionizing
radiation can do to human health, in many many ways, and it that overall alarmism influences the way people respond to this threat.
Jim Hansen's worries are all focused
on [the greenhouse gas] CO2 so he's not directly addressing the
risk question (for example, the reality that coal produces more
radiation and deaths than nuclear, etc.).
Some degree of fear is rather normal given the way humans approach
risk, particularly with something like the
risks from
radiation, and particularly given inherent trust that comes from for - profit overlay onto the «common good» and (IMO) laying that fear exclusively at the feet of environmentalists, or simply labeling it as irrational, is more a product of ideologically - driven identity - protective cognition and tribalism
on the part of nuclear proponents than a useful ingredient for making progress
on energy policy development.
Even in low Earth orbit within the magnetosphere, astronauts
on the ISS receive a dose of
radiation equivalent to about 5 — 10 chest X-rays per day, which causes an increased
risk of cancer.
«But as I commented at scienceprogress, the way I see the ledger, the religious Right gets a handful of anti-science points for views
on evolution (and related rationalizations about the age of the earth, etc.), and for some dismissal of climate change theory, but the Left gets many more anti-science points for exaggerating the health and ecological
risks of POPs; DDT; GMOs; plastics and plasticizers; pesticide residues; conventional agriculture; low - dose EM
radiation; high - tension powerlines; climate change; population growth; resource depletion; chemical sweeteners; species extinction rates; biodiversity decline; and I'm sure the list could go
on.
All Levels of
Radiation Confirmed to Cause Cancer The National Academies of Science has released an over 700 - page report
on the
risks from ionizing
radiation.
The BEIR VII or seventh Biological Effects of Ionizing
Radiation report
on «Health
Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing
Radiation» reconfirmed the previous knowledge that there is no safe level of exposure to
radiation — that even very low doses can cause cancer.
With the
on - going calamity in Japan and phrases like «nuclear meltdown» and «
radiation sickness» in headlines, it's to be expected that people discuss with renewed attention the
risks and benefits of nuclear energy.
More dramatically, fear of
radiation led to extraordinary safety requirements for nuclear power plants, far in excess of controls imposed
on other high -
risk industrial facilities, which made nuclear power less cost - competitive and led to more reliance
on coal.
However, the
risks of solar
radiation management outweigh its benefits, prompting the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (IPCC) to completely reject it.
Most of the arguments I've heard here (and made myself) against nukes are based
on economics and the
risk and effects of catastrophic failure, not small doses of
radiation.
Specifically, due to the
radiation that the plaintiff received in her left breast to treat the cancer, she was at an elevated
risk of having complications
on that breast.