estimating the burden of cancer attributable to radiation exposure
Observers over the years to the dose response relations estimates
conducted by the International Commission on Radiation Protection (ICRP),
and by other national bodies, will have witnessed them periodically
recalculating the dose and readjusting for revised views on the biological
equivalence of different energies. Each revision has lowered the permitted
exposure significantly, and on each occasion the inference has been that
this time it will be safe, and even safer if as far as is reasonably
practicable exposure is kept even lower.
The International Agency against Cancer (IARC) having had experience in
coordinating the studies of substantial populations that are required to
measure the small excesses of common diseases attributable to exposure to
specific agents, is to be commended for its organization of a
multinational population of workers whose exposure to radiation has been
monitored. The authors suggest that there is a 1-2 per cent excess risk
of death from cancer at the low doses and dose rates typically received
by nuclear workers at "acceptable" levels of exposure. It is no criticism
of IARC that they have only studied mortality; vital statistics themselves
are not always readily accessible. With advances in therapy, the full
burden of cancer is best measured by registration data. Access to cancer
registers, where they exist, can be even more problematic than to death
registers. The reader must bear in mind, that over and above the excess
mortality reported by the authors there is an additional attributable
burden of clinical disease.
Rapid Response:
estimating the burden of cancer attributable to radiation exposure
Observers over the years to the dose response relations estimates
conducted by the International Commission on Radiation Protection (ICRP),
and by other national bodies, will have witnessed them periodically
recalculating the dose and readjusting for revised views on the biological
equivalence of different energies. Each revision has lowered the permitted
exposure significantly, and on each occasion the inference has been that
this time it will be safe, and even safer if as far as is reasonably
practicable exposure is kept even lower.
The International Agency against Cancer (IARC) having had experience in
coordinating the studies of substantial populations that are required to
measure the small excesses of common diseases attributable to exposure to
specific agents, is to be commended for its organization of a
multinational population of workers whose exposure to radiation has been
monitored. The authors suggest that there is a 1-2 per cent excess risk
of death from cancer at the low doses and dose rates typically received
by nuclear workers at "acceptable" levels of exposure. It is no criticism
of IARC that they have only studied mortality; vital statistics themselves
are not always readily accessible. With advances in therapy, the full
burden of cancer is best measured by registration data. Access to cancer
registers, where they exist, can be even more problematic than to death
registers. The reader must bear in mind, that over and above the excess
mortality reported by the authors there is an additional attributable
burden of clinical disease.
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests