Radiation Protection Policies to Protect Public Health

 by James Muckerheide,
Mass. State Nuclear Engineer

May 14, 1995

Radium decays to radon, a noble gas, which migrates to the blood stream to be discharged to the lungs (which distributes decay products and dose). Roughly 30% is exhaled. Radon decay products collecting in sinuses have caused head carcinomas.

Starting in 1932, Dr. Robley Evans' team at MIT ultimately followed >600 radium-burden cases. This team of eminent scientists was a major contributor to our understanding of radium ingestion and distribution physics, medicine, biology, biochemistry, and health effects.¹ Anticipating WWII radium dial needs, in 1941 Dr. Evans led national experts in setting a 0.1 uCi Ra-226 residual body burden limit, with a margin of safety. Each member of the group voiced no qualms about their wives or daughters being so exposed (since dial-painters were typically young women.)

Until the 1930s, the invigorating effects of moderate levels of radiation on plant, animal, and human life enticed the public, unaware of potential long term effects.

Then, in 1932 Eben Byers' died from using Radithor (starting in 1928 at age 51). Radithor is a patent medicine elixir made by William Bailey containing 1 uCi Ra-228 and 1 uCi Ra-226 in 1/2 oz distilled water.^2,3 Enamored of its invigorating qualities, Mr. Byers used several bottles a day, giving it to friends by the case. In 1931 his bones deteriorated, causing his jaw to be removed with other disfiguring effects, leading to a notorious death.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was seeking control of radiation use. Eben Byers was a highly recognized multi-millionaire industrialist, sportsman, and socialite. His gruesome death received national attention. FDA was able to achieve radiation control authority. The public largely abandoned radiation use except by medical direction.

FDA, after Byers' overdose, did not follow those who ingested the 400,000-500,000 vials of Radithor estimated sold (Mr. Byers used up to ~3,000), to assess their health or determine whether safe levels existed. (Such studies would acknowledge the potential for dose significance). Others who had ingested Radithor, including William Bailey himself (who died in 1959 at age 64 reportedly from colon cancer), claimed to have ingested more Radithor than Byers, but not as quickly; and others accumulated much higher doses without adverse effects.

The Center for Human Radiobiology (CHR), established at Argonne National Laboratories, consolidated radium studies at Dr. Evans' retirement in 1970.³ As of 1979, as reported in an International Conference in Lake Geneva WI, there were 84 cancers in 4,076 radium cases exposed in the period from 1900-1950³. Many were symptom-selected (including exhumations) limiting the epidemiological validity of the population.

There were 60 cancers in 1,953 cases where there was a measured dose. This included 1,468 young, female dial painters, with 42 cancers, NONE of which were below ~2000 rad. (A QF of 3-20 would convert to 6,000 - 40,000 rem.) There was 1 cancer in 8 female non-dial-painter cases in the range of 1000-2000 rads.

In 347 males, 3 cancers occurred in 16 cases in the range of 10,000-40,000 rads (30,000 to 800,000 rem), with none in 319 cases <10,000 rad (and none in 12 cases >40,000 rad).³

As Dr. Evans summarized for the Conference: "...studies... continue to show no radiogenic tumors, or other effects, in hundreds of persons whose effective initial body burden was less than about 50 uCi Ra-226 and whose cumulative skeletal average dose is less than about 1000 rad". (Ref 3, p. 572)

CHR. was to be "an immortal organization" for radium case lifetimes, but Federal funding was severely cut in the early 1980s, then terminated, with 1000s of living cases being continuously exposed to their internal radium burden doses. (Former Director Dr. Robert Rowland's report on the program has just been published as a monograph by Argonne in limited quantity and distribution.⁴

Notwithstanding these results, Federal drinking water limits are 5 pCi/l Ra-226 (~5 pCi/day, ~2,000 pCi/yr), at significant public cost, while the US radium studies data, confirmed by population data in other countries, find zero health effects at exposures less than 50,000,000 pCi Ra-226 equivalent systemic uptake in CHR studies over 50 years. This equates to no effects at less than 250,000,000 pCi Ra-226 equivalent ingestion, based on the established uptake factor of 20%.

Areas with high levels of radium in water also show no consequences, with related studies that would be more definitive also having lost Federal support.

Comparing drinking water standards to Radithor and Byers' death:

~5 pCi/day, vs. ~3,500,000 pCi Ra-226 equivalent in 1 Radithor vial;

~2,000 pCi/yr, vs. ~10,000,000,000 pCi Ra-226 equivalent in 3 years ingested by Byers;

100s of people ingested >400,000 vials (>1,400,000,000,000 pCi Ra-226 equivalent)

Federal radioactive waste management, decommissioning and decontamination standards, and public protection standards for releases of radioactive materials, are effectively much more stringent than radium in drinking water. These standards are met at a public cost greatly exceeding $1 trillion. (Standards are set at levels to require some public action and cost by the standard-setting agencies; not on a basis to protect public health.)

Similar results (at fewer orders of magnitude) apply to health effects data from the other exposed populations sources and doses:

Occupational exposure: doses to 500 rem for radiologists, with NO excess cancers⁵; and exposed nuclear shipyard workers, with mortality 0.76 of the non-nuclear workers⁶;

Medical exposures: e.g., I-131 50 rem thyroid, and 10 rem WB, with no excess cancers⁵; and large reductions in breast cancer from 5-30 rem fluoroscopy⁷;

Natural background: no adverse health effects to ~10 times average, and some reduced effects; with detailed radioactivity, dose, and health studies in large, identical, Chinese populations at 3 times controls⁵; no radon effects in non-smoking uranium miners at <1000 times a 70 year lifetime indoor radon dose, and lung cancer in non-smokers is a different type than lung cancer in high dose uranium miners⁵; and lung cancer strongly correlates inversely with radon for all US counties from 272,000 home radon measurements, including allowing for smoking effects and all other potential confounding effects⁷;

Weapons and facilities release exposures: there is no excess cancer in 42,000 military personnel directly exposed to above-ground weapons tests⁵; and

Japanese survivors: no excess or reduced cancers at <20-50 rem, with no excess non-cancer health effects at <200 rem, and with increased longevity in the exposed population.⁸

The fundamental scientific data, from plant, animal and human populations, more strongly indicate that radiation is essential to life, including that suppressing background radiation is debilitating, and that moderately enhanced radiation doses have positive effects, than that low to moderate radiation dose has adverse health effects.⁸

Federal radiation protection policy will be in the public interest, and save $100s Billions at no public health risk or cost, when known dose effects to exposed populations are applied to assure that no adverse health effects from radiation occur, with safety margins; and that related research on actual health effects to actual exposed populations is funded rather than suppressed. This will enable public health resources be directed to improve public health ; and will also enable public benefits from new radiation and nuclear science and technology applications, at the sole cost of reduced Federal agency power and influence.

Ref.

1. Evans, Robley D., 1974; "Radium in Man", HPJ, 27 (November), 497-510

2. Macklis, R., 1993, "The Great Radium Scandal", Scientific American, Aug., 94

3. Rundo, J., et al, Editors, 1983; "Radiobiology of Radium and the Actinides in Man", Proceedings of an International Conference, 11-16 October 1981; HPJ 44 Suppl. 1

4. Rowland, R.E., 1994 "Radium in Humans: A Review of US Studies" ANL/ER-3 UC-408

5. Yalow, R., 1994, "Concerns with Low Level Ionizing Radiation", Trans. Am. Nucl. Soc., 71, 32

6. Cameron, J., 1994, "What Does the Nuclear Shipyard Study Tell Us?", Trans. Am. Nucl. Soc., 71, 36

7. Pollycove, M., 1994, "Low Level Radiation, Adaptive Responses and Decreased Carcinogenesis", Trans. Am. Nucl. Soc., 71, 38

8. Kondo, S., 1994, "Atomic Bomb Survivors and the Sigmoidal Response Model", Trans. Am. Nucl. Soc., 71, 34

Session: Low Level Radiation Health Effects: Policies and Cost/Benefits

Comments to:
Jim Muckerheide
rad_sci_health@comcast.net
rad_sci_health@comcast.net