Issues
Possible dose threshold for the formation of a group of potential risks among nuclear personnel
"Radiation and Risk", 2005, Special issue 1, p.4-81
Author
Ivanov V.K., Tsyb A.F., Agapov A.M.1, Panfilov A.P.1, Gorsky A.I.,
Kaidalov O.V., Maksyutov M.A., God'ko A.M., Tumanov K.A.
Medical Radiological Research Center of RAMS, Obninsk.
1Federal Atomic Energy Agency, Moscow.
Abstract
The problem of forming groups of potential risks among the personnel of the nuclear industry acquires particular relevance in connection with the preparation of new recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). This document should be published in 2005, but from the middle of 2004 (after the 11th Congress of the International Radiation Protection Association - IRPA11), its project is available on the Internet. In the section "Optimization of protection" of the draft new recommendations of the ICRP, it is noted that it is necessary to make decisions using the factors of the time and spatial distribution of the processes of human exposure, the formation of a certain "dose matrix" at the individual level. As a matter of fact, we are talking about involving all the current potential of radiation epidemiology for forming groups of potential risks (GPR) with the focus on providing, if necessary, targeted medical care, especially at the stages of early diagnosis of oncological and non-oncological diseases [1]. Since the ICRP has retained a linear dose-free dose-to-effect model, it could be formally assumed that all persons subjected to occupational exposure (even in small doses) should be included in the GPR. However, summing up the results of large-scale epidemiological studies carried out over the last 15-20 years (Hiroshima-Nagasaki, Chernobyl, Southern Ural, International Register of Atomic Workers, etc.), it should be concluded that direct statistically significant evidence of radiation-induced carcinogenesis in the field of low doses of radiation (up to 100-150 mSv) was not received. The Japanese studies (which are based on many recommendations of the ICRP, the cohort number of 87,500 people) do not provide valid evidence of radiation-induced carcinogenic effects in the small dose range (0-100 mSv). The absence of a statistically significant risk of leukemia morbidity among the liquidators in the range of doses of 0-150 mSv also indicates serious limitations in the use of the linear no-threshold dose-effect model in order to optimize the radiation protection system for the personnel of the nuclear industry. Thus, the large-scale epidemiological studies performed to date do not contradict the introduction of a possible dose threshold (VDP) for assessing the medical consequences of radiation exposure at low doses (in the range from 0 to about 100-150 mSv). In this case, another, to some extent, inverse problem arises. Using, for example, the geographical variability of the indicator of spontaneous cancer morbidity, is it possible to evaluate it in terms similar to the radiation risk factor.
Keywords
Assessment, possible dose threshold, liquidators, Chernobyl accident, leukemia, small doses of radiation, radiation-induced carcinogenesis, nuclear industry personnel, no-threshold model, radiation risk factor .
References
1. Ivanov V.K., Tsyb A.F., Agapov A.M., Panfilov A.P., Kaidalov O.V., Gorsky A.I., Maksyutov M.A., Suspitsin Yu.V., Weiser V.I. The concept of optimization of the radiation protection system in the industry: management of individual carcinogenic risks and provision of targeted medical care. Bulletin on Atomic Energy. 2004. No. 11. PP. 28-35.
2. Preston D.L. Radiation-related health risks at low doses among the atomic bomb survivors. Proceedings of the 11th International Congress of the International Radiation Protection Association, Plenary Panel Session 1. Madrid, Spain, 23-28 May, 2004.
3. Ivanov V.K., Tsyb A.F., Gorski A. I., Khait S.E., Maksioutov M.A., Vlasov O.K. Radiological health effects of the Chernobyl accident. Proceedings of the 11th International Congress of the International Radiation Protection Association. p.30. Madrid, Spain, 23-28 May, 2004.
4. The main indicators of the status of specialized oncological care for the population of Russia. Handbook edited by V.I. Cissov, V.V. Starinsky, L.V. Remennik (1995-2003). Edition of the P. A. Herzen Moscow Scientific Oncology Institute.
5. Handbook of Applied Statistics. Edited by E. Lloyd and U. Liderman (translated from English under the editorship of Yu.N. Tyurin). Moscow, Finances and Statistics Publ., 1989.
6. Report of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation for 2000. Appendix J. Levels of exposure and effects from the Chernobyl accident. Trans. from English A.A. Vainson, M.N. Mavkin and S.M. Shinkarev; Ed. Yu.S. Ryabukhin and S.P. Yarmonenko. Moscow, RADEKON Publ., 2001.
Full-text article (in Russian)