Radium in humans: A review of U.S. studies

Rowland, Robert C.

doi:10.2172/10114798

Cited by 37 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Radium dial painters who received <30 Gy had a longer average lifespan than the population around them; the SMR was 0.88 for all causes of death, p <0.05; 0.75 for all circulatory diseases, p < 0.01 and 0.48 for cardiovascular diseases, p <0.01 (Rowland, 1994). Radium dial painters who received less than 30 Gy (the lifetime threshold) had no increased cancer death rate and a leukaemia death rate which was only 20% that of a control population -Ro98.…”

Section: Appendixmentioning

confidence: 96%

Documented optimum and threshold for ionising radiation

Luckey

2007

IJNUCL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A concept of the complete dose-response curve of ionising radiation will allow us to live in harmony with this ubiquitous agent. Convincing data show ionising radiation is essential for life. Ambient levels of ionising radiation (about 2 mSv/y without medical and cosmic radiation) are adequate for life but insufficient for abundant health. We live with a partial deficiency of ionising radiation. Thousands of people have lived for generations with 2-20 times the ambient levels of radiation without showing ill health. A conservative threshold, the maximum safe level of radiation, was estimated from abundant rodent data to be about 8000 mSv/y. When human and rodent data were collated, a conservative optimum of 60 mSv/y was obtained. Radiation levels greater than the threshold are harmful. The facts suggest that radiobiologists and governments should abandon the 'linear no threshold' (LNT) paradigm and accept natural and industrial low level sources of ionising radiation in order to promote abundant health.

show abstract

Section: Appendixmentioning

confidence: 96%

Documented optimum and threshold for ionising radiation

Luckey

2007

IJNUCL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some of the early medical uses of radium in the U.S. are identified in Radium in Humans (Rowland 1994). Results were published in the journal Radium until 1921.…”

Section: Is Nuclear Power Really a Significant Health Risk?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Internal and external applications of radium, i.e. drinking a radium salt solution or beaming radiation on specific areas, were used by physicians to treat many diseases, such as arthritis, high blood pressure, hypertension and pain (Rowland 1994). A study of more than 2000 radium dial painters determined the maximum body burden of radium to be 0.1 micrograms (including a 10-100 safety factor).…”

Section: Radiation Hormesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Nuclear Energy and Health

Cuttler¹,

Pollycove

2008

Dose-Response

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ᮀ Energy needs worldwide are expected to increase for the foreseeable future, but fuel supplies are limited. Nuclear reactors could supply much of the energy demand in a safe, sustainable manner were it not for fear of potential releases of radioactivity. Such releases would likely deliver a low dose or dose rate of radiation, within the range of naturally occurring radiation, to which life is already accustomed. The key areas of concern are discussed. Studies of actual health effects, especially thyroid cancers, following exposures are assessed. Radiation hormesis is explained, pointing out that beneficial effects are expected following a low dose or dose rate because protective responses against stresses are stimulated. The notions that no amount of radiation is small enough to be harmless and that a nuclear accident could kill hundreds of thousands are challenged in light of experience: more than a century with radiation and six decades with reactors. If nuclear energy is to play a significant role in meeting future needs, regulatory authorities must examine the scientific evidence and communicate the real health effects of nuclear radiation. Negative images and implications of health risks derived by unscientific extrapolations of harmful effects of high doses must be dispelled. Keywords: sustainable nuclear energy, radiation health effects, radiation hormesis, social acceptance, regulatory implications INTRODUCTIONAs populations grow and developing countries strive for a higher standard of living, the rate of energy consumption rises, as shown in Figure 1. By 2030, global energy demand is projected to increase by 50%, with electricity generation nearly doubling worldwide-an annual increase of 2.4% (IEA 2003, IEA 2008, DOE/EIA 2008a). Nuclear energy is receiving much attention today because of concerns about our energy sources. Environmental groups are urging large reductions in our combustion of coal and hydrocarbons (the source of 88.6% of our primary energy) to reduce the increasing concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. While the impact of carbon dioxide emissions on global warming is controversial, the pollution from large-scale burning of coal and other fuels is generally recognized as having an adverse impact on air quality and health. Sharply rising oil and gas prices both generate and reflect concerns about future supplies of these fuels, yet many environmental groups advocate options that avoid the use of nuclear power for electrical generation. They feel that such use would expose living organisms to radiation and increase the risk of nuclear weapons proliferation.This article discusses nuclear energy and how this energy source affects health. Many people are very apprehensive about nuclear power. For more than sixty years, they have received much information that associates nuclear technologies with health risks and almost no information about the health benefits. They are worried about potential exposure to nuclear radiation and consequent cell damage. The incidence of adverse health...

show abstract

“…The history of the radium dial painters, primarily women, has been well documented along with the follow-up health studies (e.g. Stebbings, 2001;Fry, 1998) and Rowland (1994) provides a classic review of the impact and health related research undertaken in the US. In the UK, radium production ended by the mid 1930's although imported radium salts continued to be used for medicine, industry and military purposes into the 1960s in the UK (Harvie, 1999).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The radium legacy: Contaminated land and the committed effective dose from the ingestion of radium contaminated materials

Tyler

Dale

Copplestone

et al. 2013

Environment International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The manufacture and use of radium in the early to mid-20 th century within industrial, medicinal and recreational products has resulted in a large number of contaminated sites across a number of countries with notable examples in the USA and Europe. These sites, represent a significant number of unregulated sources of potential radiological exposure that have collectively and hitherto not been well characterised. In 2007, the Radioactive Contaminated Land (RCL) regulations came into force in the UK, providing the statutory guidance for regulators to classify and deal with RCL. Here we report on results derived from digestion experiments to estimate committed effective dose, a key aspect of the RCL regulations, from the ingestion of radium contaminated sources that can be found in the environment. This case study includes particles, clinker and artefacts that arise from past military activities on a site that was once an airfield at Dalgety Bay on the Firth of Forth, UK. Since 2011 the number of radium contaminated finds have increased by one order of magnitude on the foreshore areas of Dalgety Bay. The increase in finds may in large part be attributed to a change in monitoring practice. A sub sample of sixty sources were selected, on the basis of their activity and dimensions, and subjected to digestion in simulated stomach and lower intestine solutions. The study demonstrated that more radium-226 ( Pb varied from less than 1 % to up to 35 % ICRP 72 conversion factors were used to convert the activities measured in solution to committed effective dose. A little over 10 % of the sources tested dissolved sufficient radioactivity to result in 100 mSv committed effective dose to an infant. Using the solubility of 35 % as a worst case, minimum source activities necessary to deliver 100 mSv to the full age range of users of the foreshore were estimated. All the estimated activities have been detected and recovered through routine monitoring.

show abstract

Radium in humans: A review of U.S. studies

Cited by 37 publications

References 36 publications

Documented optimum and threshold for ionising radiation

Documented optimum and threshold for ionising radiation

Nuclear Energy and Health

The radium legacy: Contaminated land and the committed effective dose from the ingestion of radium contaminated materials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About