FEAR OF RADIATION – UNNECESSARY

The word RADIATION reminds of dropping of atomic bombs over Japan during the Second World War and the mass destruction of everything in the vicinity of the explosion sites. The effects of the exposures were short term like radiation syndrome and long term, like cancer. That is how the world today came to know about radiation. Since then, there have numerous beneficial effects and peaceful uses of radiation, which has been benefiting the society to a very great extent. Examples are: nuclear power and medical uses of radiation and radioisotopes for diagnosis and therapy. Safety records of such applications are very good as compared to other industries. In fact, other industries should emulate the safety considerations and provisions made in the nuclear industry.

Unlike in other industries, because of the fear of radiation, the effects of radiation exposure on humans are extensively studied and documented. The radioactivity measurement techniques are very well developed and at present a very small amount of radioactive material, in less than nano-gram (one-billionth of a gram) levels can be measured with required accuracy using specially designed electronic instruments. The very data on the health effects of the survivors of the bomb explosion served as the primary database for determination of the radiation exposure risk to the workers and the members of the public. We also have enough data on the health effects of low level radiation exposures of the people living in high radiation background areas (HBRA) in countries like India and China.

The truth is we are all living in this world where there exists natural background radiation, such as cosmic radiation and radiation from the earth consisting of small amounts of radioactive materials like uranium and thorium. This exposure is unavoidable. Public is unawareness of this fact. Nobody really told them or explained to them to be convinced.

However, public reacts to radiation with fear and anxiety. It is the fear of unknown. These indications need to be counterbalanced. How?
1. Two-way open communication between all the stakeholders to be enhanced to break the mutual distrust.
2. Natural background radiation levels can be displayed in public places. Follow one unit to express exposure to radiation. Too many units confuse the public.
3. Use of the term dose limit can be discontinued. It has lost its significance.
4. Improve public familiarity with respect to the effects of radiation and compare the effects with other more familiar environmental pollutants. Use the language which is easily followed by the public, in their language.
5. Educate the public what to do by themselves in case of any release of radioactivity into the environment and high radiation levels.
6. There is no point in highlighting health effects of human exposure to high radiation levels (radiation syndrome) which is likely to occur only during incidents or accidents.
7. Beneficial effects of radiation for health care (medicine) should be projected in schools and collages rather than the biological effects of radiation.
8. In general, public accepts whatever is beneficial or useful to them. Good examples are electricity and use cooking gas. Controllable risk is generally acceptable.