TOWARD IMPROVED IONIZING RADIATION SAFETY STANDARDS

Some issues concerning the effect of ionizing radiation on the human body and methodological approaches to the development of radiation safety standards are considered. It is shown that the use of the linear no-threshold hypothesis (LNT hypothesis) in up-to-date radiation safety standards is inconsistent with experimental and epidemiological dose-response data, introduces essential excessive conservatism in the safety assessment process and causes additional problems concerning nuclear power engineering development. Due to the absence of convincing proofs for the existence of the dose threshold* nowadays, it is assumed that any ionizing radiation can lead to a certain risk of developing harmful effects and, therefore, the linear non-threshold dependence between the dose and the probability of the harmful effect is recommended. However, everyone understands that the use of the LNT hypothesis significantly overestimates the real danger. At the same time, the LNT hypothesis aggravates the existing high public fear of nuclear power, and the nuclear power industry pays extraordinary expenses to comply with radiation protection standards based on the LNT hypothesis. In order to comply with rules and regulations based on the LNT hypothesis, the nuclear energy industry invests financial resources in the creation of additional safety barriers for nuclear facilities, as well as new security and control systems. One of the reasons for increasing the cost for construction of a nuclear power plant is the increased design cost caused by enhanced safety requirements that are based on the LNT hypothesis. The traditional engineering approach to ensure the safety of nuclear facilities is based on the increase in the number of protective systems and devices that reduce the probability of severe accidents and reduce the radiation hazard of their consequences. Implementation of this approach in practice leads to a complication and a rise in the price of a nuclear facility. Obviously, it is possible to substantially enhance the safety level of nuclear facilities by creating new and new safety barriers around them, but sooner or later the nuclear energy production will become uncompetitive compared to the generation of other kinds of energy. It is concluded that up-to-date knowledge gives all the necessary grounds for eliminating the use of the linear no-threshold hypothesis and for revising the existing radiation safety standards of Ukraine for some isolated technological operations related to radiation hazardous activities. Such technological operations include activities related to the mitigation of radiation accident consequences, retrieval of nuclear materials and other activities related to the Shelter’s transformation into an environmentally safe system.

Download Full-text

Manual on the proper use of sodium astatide ([211At]NaAt) injections in clinical trials for targeted alpha therapy (1st edition)

Annals of Nuclear Medicine ◽

10.1007/s12149-021-01619-2 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Tadashi Watabe ◽

Makoto Hosono ◽

Seigo Kinuya ◽

Takahiro Yamada ◽

Sachiko Yanagida ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trials ◽

Japanese Society ◽

Radiation Safety ◽

Safety Management ◽

Evaluation Methodology ◽

Targeted Alpha Therapy ◽

Safety Issues ◽

Safety Standards ◽

And Training ◽

Alpha Therapy

AbstractWe present the guideline for use of [211At] sodium astatide (NaAt) for targeted alpha therapy in clinical trials on the basis of radiation safety issues in Japan. This guideline was prepared by a study supported by the Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare, and approved by the Japanese Society of Nuclear Medicine on 8th Feb, 2021. The study showed that patients receiving [211At]NaAt do not need to be admitted to a radiotherapy room and outpatient treatment is possible. The radiation exposure from the patient is within the safety standards of the ICRP and IAEA recommendations for the general public and caregivers. Precautions for patients and their families, safety management associated with the use of [211At]NaAt, education and training, and disposal of medical radioactive contaminants are also included in this guideline. Treatment using [211At]NaAt in Japan should be carried out according to this guideline. Although this guideline is applied in Japan, the issues for radiation protection and evaluation methodology shown here are considered internationally useful as well.

Download Full-text

Pelatihan Keselamatan dan Keamanan Radiasi Pengion di RSUP Dr Kariadi Pada Masa Pandemi

10.53862/ssi.v1.062021.003 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Sanggam Ramantisan ◽

◽

Siti Akbari Pandaningrum ◽

Suwardi Suwardi ◽

Syarifudin Syarifudin ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Ionizing Radiation ◽

Radiation Protection ◽

Radiation Safety ◽

Community Members ◽

Medical Field ◽

Online Delivery ◽

Face To Face ◽

Security Training ◽

Field Practice ◽

Radiation Workers

Ionizing radiation safety in the medical field, referred to as radiation safety, is an action taken to protect patients, workers, community members, and the environment from the dangers of radiation. One of the efforts to achieve this is by increasing the qualifications of radiation workers in understanding and implementing radiation protection and safety through ionizing radiation safety and security training initiated by the Radiation Protection Officer (PPR) team at Dr. RSUP. Kariadi Semarang. During the current pandemic, implemented the training by modifying what was previously done using face-to-face and field practice into online delivery of material and making videos as a substitute for field practice. As a result, these activities can run well and smoothly. The impression from the training participants stated that this training was beneficial and should be done regularly. Keywords: training, ionizing radiation, radiation protection officer

Download Full-text

Justification of Remediation Criteria of Uranium Legacy Sites

Medical Radiology and radiation safety ◽

10.12737/1024-6177-2021-66-4-54-57 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 66 (4) ◽

pp. 54-57

Author(s):

A. Titov ◽

N. Shandala ◽

Yu. Bel'skih ◽

D. Isaev ◽

M. Semenova ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Effective Dose ◽

Radiation Safety ◽

Annual Effective Dose ◽

Uranium Mining ◽

Radioactive Material ◽

Reference Level ◽

Federal Law ◽

Reference Levels ◽

Economic Activities ◽

Safety Standards

Purpose: To present approaches to establishing the criteria for remediation of sites contaminated due to past activities of uranium mining and milling facilities. These facilities are considered today as uranium legacy. Results: This paper presents the justified reference levels expressed in terms of annual effective dose values, which are recommended for using as remediation criteria for sites contaminated due to past activities of uranium mining and milling facilities (uranium legacy sites). Depending on further use of the sites after remediation, these criteria range from 1 µSv/year, in case of temporary presence of the population, to 10 µSv/year, in case of permanent residence of the population and conducting economic activities. Conclusions: In accordance with the international basic safety standards, accepted more than 10 years ago, exposure situations from radioactive material retained from previous activities refer to the existing exposure situation. Nevertheless, neither Federal Law “On Radiation Safety of the Population” nor Radiation Safety Standards have so far introduced terms “existing exposure situation” covering exposure at nuclear and uranium legacy sites and “reference level”, which is used to assure radiation safety of the population living at legacy sites or using these sites for the purpose of the economic activities.

Download Full-text

Harmonization of the Russian Federation Legislation with Current International Recommendations

Medical Radiology and radiation safety ◽

10.12737/1024-6177-2021-66-6-111-115 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 66 (6) ◽

pp. 111-115

Author(s):

O. Kochetkov ◽

V. Klochkov ◽

A. Samoylov ◽

N. Shandala

Keyword(s):

Russian Federation ◽

Radiation Safety ◽

Strong Relationship ◽

Legal Regulation ◽

Regulatory Framework ◽

Federal Law ◽

Safety Standards ◽

Legal Documents ◽

Article Analysis ◽

The Russian Federation

Purpose: Harmonization of the Russian Federation legislation with current international recommendations Results: The concept of the radiation safety system has been significantly modified by recommendations of ICRP (2007) and IAEA (2014). An analysis of existing international regulatory framework for radiation safety allowed to identify the main provisions to be implemented in the Russian legal and regulatory framework. It’s showed that the current Federal Law of 09.01.1996 No. 3-FZ «On Radiation Safety of Population» must be ultimately revised to be harmonized with international documents. General approaches to legal regulation of radiation safety should be essentially modified to create a strong relationship between this law and other regulatory and legal documents in force in the Russian Federation. Conclusion: An article-by-article analysis of the current Federal Law of 09.01.1996 No. 3-FZ «On Radiation Safety of Population « showed the need to modify 22 existing articles and add 12 new articles in order to harmonize it with international documents. Given such a large volume of modification it is advisable to pass a new law with simultaneous abolition of the current federal law. A new name has been proposed: Federal Law of the Russian Federation «On Radiation Safety in the Russian Federation». The enactment of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation «On Radiation Safety in the Russian Federation» with the main by-laws approved by the Russian Federation Government – «Radiation Safety Standards» and «Basic Rules for Ensuring Radiation Safety» – will allow to establish an actual regulatory framework for ensuring radiation safety of personnel and population in Russia.

Download Full-text

The importance of public health in radiology and radiation protection

Journal of Public Health Research ◽

10.4081/jphr.2021.2141 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Zuzana Bárdyová ◽

Martina Horváthová ◽

Katarína Pinčáková ◽

Darina Budošová

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Ionizing Radiation ◽

Radiation Safety ◽

Biological Effects ◽

Rapid Development ◽

Physical Factors ◽

Constant Attention ◽

The Public ◽

Many Sources ◽

Safety Knowledge

The ionizing radiation belongs to the basic physical factors that can be measured. We forget often about its risks and the possible damage to our health. The imaging methods which use the ionizing radiation increase the diagnostics quality and they have become a certainty for many medical workers. Therefore, they are being used without rational thinking many times. With this is related to increasing the cumulative dose of patients. Next problem can be radiation safety knowledge of medical workers. The enormous increase in the use of sources ionizing radiation in medicine and rapid development, there may be a disproportionate acquisition of radiation safety knowledge of healthcare workers. At the same time, constant attention must be paid to the biological effects of radiation and realize epidemiology studies. In all the areas mentioned the public health has space. However, it is sad that presently, the radiation safety is not considered important enough in Public Health. Based on many sources, it is safe to say that this is a major problem, because the public health itself can play an important role in radiation safety. It is important to point out, that safety and effectivity of using the source of ionizing radiation is one of the main components of Good Medical Practice.

Download Full-text

То the problem of irradiation dosing of population in radionuclde studies

Kazan medical journal ◽

10.17816/kazmj84096 ◽

2001 ◽

Vol 82 (5) ◽

pp. 383-385

Author(s):

V. G. Morozov ◽

R. K. Ismagilov ◽

V. F. Chuprun

Keyword(s):

Gamma Radiation ◽

Radiation Safety ◽

Radiation Doses ◽

Safety Standards ◽

The Given

It is shown that with the introduction of new wording of the radiation safety standards - 99 regulating powers of gamma-radiation doses at the distance of one meter from the patient, treated by radiopharma-ceutical drugs, should not exceed three mcSv/h. The number noted is obviously set too high and should be substantiated. Abolition of the adopted standards and statement of the given regulations in the radiation safety standards 99 in new wording is not proven enough substantiated.

Download Full-text

Radiation Safety Knowledge and Practice Amongst Doctors in a Teaching Hospital in the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria

Western Journal of Medical and Biomedical Sciences ◽

10.46912/wjmbs.35 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 2 (1) ◽

pp. 13-22

Author(s):

JE Ikubor ◽

SN Awunor ◽

EE Atare

Keyword(s):

Ionizing Radiation ◽

Radiation Protection ◽

Teaching Hospital ◽

Niger Delta ◽

Radiation Safety ◽

Good Practice ◽

Good Knowledge ◽

Body Parts ◽

Knowledge And Practice ◽

Safety Knowledge

It is important that doctors of the various specialties in a health facility requesting for radiological examinations are knowledgeable about the effect of ionizing radiation. When referring doctors know the amount of radiation their patients receive there will be justification for such investigations in line with the guiding principle of radiation protection – As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) - to minimize risk to the patient. The objective of this study is to assess the knowledge and practice of radiation protection and safety amongst doctors in a Teaching Hospital in the Niger Delta, Nigeria. This is a cross-sectional descriptive study using a self-administered structured questionnaire among 131 doctors in Delta State University Teaching Hospital (DELSUTH), Oghara. Data was analyzed using the IBM SPSS v.21. Eighty-eight (67.2%) respondents had a good knowledge of radiation safety while 49 (37.4%) of respondents had a good practice of radiation protection and safety. There was an association between the department of respondents (p=0.009), awareness of body parts sensitive to radiation (p=0.005) and their knowledge of radiation safety. Also, there was an association between the department of respondents (p=0.016), their years of experience (p=0.016) and the practice of radiation safety. Knowledge of radiation safety was high while the practice of radiation protection and safety was low amongst respondents. Gender, department of doctor and awareness of body parts that are sensitive to radiation were associated with good knowledge; while department and years of experience was associated with good practice. It is recommended that doctors receive regular updates on radiation hazards, risks and protection in order to reduce the risk of exposure of patients and health workers to unnecessary ionizing radiation.

Download Full-text