LOW-DOSE EXTRAPOLATION OF RADIATION HEALTH RISKS: SOME IMPLICATIONS OF UNCERTAINTY FOR RADIATION PROTECTION AT LOW DOSES

被引:21
作者
Land, Charles E. [1 ]
机构
[1] NCI, NIH, Radiat Epidemiol Branch EPS 7046, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
来源
HEALTH PHYSICS | 2009年 / 97卷 / 05期
关键词
cancer; epidemiology; linear hypothesis; National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements; ATOMIC-BOMB SURVIVORS; CANCER-RISKS;
D O I
10.1097/HP.0b013e3181b1871b
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Ionizing radiation is a known and well-quantified human cancer risk factor, based on a remarkably consistent body of information from epidemiological studies of exposed populations. Typical examples of risk estimation include use of Japanese atomic bomb survivor data to estimate future risk from radiation-related cancer among American patients receiving multiple computed tomography scans, persons affected by radioactive fallout, or persons whose livelihoods involve some radiation exposure, such as x-ray technicians, interventional radiologists, or shipyard workers. Our estimates of radiation-related risk are uncertain, reflecting statistical variation and our imperfect understanding of crucial assumptions that must be made if we are to apply existing epidemiological data to particular situations. Fortunately, that uncertainty is also highly quantifiable, and can be presented concisely and transparently. Radiation protection is ultimately a political process that involves consent by stakeholders, a diverse group that includes people who might be expected to be risk-averse and concerned with plausible upper limits on risk (how bad could it be?), cost-averse and concerned with lower limits on risk (can you prove there is a nontrivial risk at current dose levels?), or combining both points of view. How radiation-related risk is viewed by individuals and population subgroups also depends very much on perception of related benefit, which might be (for example) medical, economic, altruistic, or nonexistent The following presentation follows the lead of National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) Commentary 14, NCRP Report 126, and later documents in treating radiation protection from the viewpoint of quantitative uncertainty analysis. Health Phys. 97(5):407-415; 2009
引用
收藏
页码:407 / 415
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] A New Era of Low-Dose Radiation Epidemiology
    Kitahara C.M.
    Linet M.S.
    Rajaraman P.
    Ntowe E.
    Berrington de González A.
    Current Environmental Health Reports, 2015, 2 (3) : 236 - 249
  • [22] Some Epidemiologic Studies of Low-Dose-Radiation Cancer Risks Are Misinforming
    Scott, Bobby R.
    DOSE-RESPONSE, 2021, 19 (02):
  • [23] Low-Dose Radiation Risks of Computerized Tomography and Cone Beam Computerized Tomography: Reducing the Fear and Controversy
    Lee, Cameron Y. S.
    Koval, Thomas M.
    Suzuki, Jon B.
    JOURNAL OF ORAL IMPLANTOLOGY, 2015, 41 (05) : E223 - E230
  • [24] Low-dose radiation risk and individual variation in radiation sensitivity in Fukushima
    Fukunaga, Hisanori
    Yokoya, Akinari
    JOURNAL OF RADIATION RESEARCH, 2016, 57 (01) : 98 - 100
  • [25] Reflections on effects of low doses and risk inference based on the UNSCEAR 2021 report on 'biological mechanisms relevant for the inference of cancer risks from low-dose and low-dose-rate radiation'
    Wojcik, Andrzej
    JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION, 2022, 42 (02)
  • [26] Typical doses and dose rates in studies pertinent to radiation risk inference at low doses and low dose rates
    Ruehm, Werner
    Azizova, Tamara
    Bouffler, Simon
    Cullings, Harry M.
    Grosche, Bernd
    Little, Mark P.
    Shore, Roy S.
    Walsh, Linda
    Woloschak, Gayle E.
    JOURNAL OF RADIATION RESEARCH, 2018, 59 : ii1 - ii10
  • [27] Dosimetry and uncertainty approaches for the million person study of low-dose radiation health effects: overview of the recommendations in NCRP Report No. 178
    Dauer, Lawrence T.
    Bouville, Andre
    Toohey, Richard E.
    Boice, John D., Jr.
    Beck, Harold L.
    Eckerman, Keith F.
    Hagemeyer, Derek
    Leggett, Richard W.
    Mumma, Michael T.
    Napier, Bruce
    Pryor, Kathy H.
    Rosenstein, Marvin
    Schauer, David A.
    Sherbini, Sami
    Stram, Daniel O.
    Thompson, James L.
    Till, John E.
    Yoder, R. Craig
    Zeitlin, Cary
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION BIOLOGY, 2022, 98 (04) : 600 - 609
  • [28] It Is Time to Move Beyond the Linear No-Threshold Theory for Low-Dose Radiation Protection
    Cardarelli, John J., II
    Ulsh, Brant A.
    DOSE-RESPONSE, 2018, 16 (03):
  • [29] DOES SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE SUPPORT A CHANGE FROM THE LNT MODEL FOR LOW-DOSE RADIATION RISK EXTRAPOLATION?
    Averbeck, Dietrich
    HEALTH PHYSICS, 2009, 97 (05): : 493 - 504
  • [30] Point/Counterpoint: Low-dose radiation is beneficial, not harmful
    Doss, Mohan
    Little, Mark P.
    Orton, Colin G.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2014, 41 (07)