- Email: [email protected]
Medical response to effects of ionising radiation
Ann. nucl. Energy. Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 221 222, 1990 Pergamon Press plc. Printed in Great Britain
BOOK REVIEW Medical Response to Effects of Ionising Radiation The proceedings of a conference sponsored by the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority held in London 28 - 30 June 1989 Eds. Crosbie, W.A. and Gittus, J.H. Published by Elsevier Applied Science, London and New York
£45/US$ 81.00
Nineteen papers were delivered at this conference, the title of which rather belies their contents. Although the conference aimed to address the demands placed on local, medical and emergencies services following a large release of radioactivity into the environment, the proceedings are in fact concerned with the subject of environmental radiation protection, both following an accidental release of radioactivity, and during the routine running of the nuclear industry. The papers can be divided into four broad categories - those directly addressing the medical response to nuclear accidents (5 papers), those concerned with the subject of leukaemias and low levels of radiation in the environment (six papers), those with the role of both operators and responsible government agencies in environmental protection (six papers), those with the role of both operators and responsible government agencies in environmental protection (six papers) and a miscellaneous group of two papers, one discussing the implications of recent risk estimate revisions, and the second giving a rather detailed discussion of priorities in radiobiological research in connection with radiation protection. For most readers with a general interest in events since Chernobyl, the papers on central and local government agency roles and responsibilities, in a response to an accidental release of radioactivity, will probably be the most useful. Here, in one volume, one can unravel the interconnections between DoE, DEn, MAFF, Scottish, Welsh, Northern Ireland Offices, Local Authorities and other bodies in the event of a release of radioactivity into our environment. Inevitably, there is some overlap between these papers, but their collective reading will provide a good overview of the general and specific roles of the various organizations. I believe it also may raise the question as to why there is a need for such a complicated infrastructure to an emergency response, especially at central government level. In view of the most significant effect of the Chernobyl accident on the UK (the contamination of sheep meat from certain upland areas) it is of interest that the otherwise very comprehensive paper on the role of MAFF in an emergency response mentions their use of computer models in the prediction of the agricultural effects of the aftermath of an accident - a point which may cause a few raised eyebrows seeing as it was precisely the failure, or lack of, a suitable model which led to much embarrassment within the Ministry following Chernobyl. Not unexpectedly, the Ministry's models are apparently being constantly updated, and it is assumed that their future use will go hand in hand with an appreciation of their limitations. Considerable discussion has been raging in recent years over the exact risk, in terms of cancers, to radiation; earlier estimates from Japan having been upwardly revised recently. The Director of the National Radiological Protection Board, Dr Roger Clarke, describes the reasons for these revisions of risk estimates for radiogenic cancers, and discusses the health implications for the accidents at Windscale, TMI and Chernobyl and calculates that the long-term effects on health are unlikely to be observable in any of the populations, except 221
222
Book Review
possibly amongst those evaculated from the immediate environs of Chernobyl. He concludes that the biggest problem facing those charged with dealing with future accidents is appropriate communication with the public. In this context, he calls for the wider use of "competent professionals" in any future response to a nuclear accident. Overall, the book has much to offer those from a very wide range of backgrounds with interests in the field of radiation protection, both administratively and scientifically. Practically all the papers have been compiled with an intelligent lay readership in mind and it would certainly be a good buy for both science and public libraries. Dr K. Mondon
BOOK REVIEW Medical Response to Effects of Ionising Radiation The proceedings of a conference sponsored by the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority held in London 28 - 30 June 1989 Eds. Crosbie, W.A. and Gittus, J.H. Published by Elsevier Applied Science, London and New York
£45/US$ 81.00
Nineteen papers were delivered at this conference, the title of which rather belies their contents. Although the conference aimed to address the demands placed on local, medical and emergencies services following a large release of radioactivity into the environment, the proceedings are in fact concerned with the subject of environmental radiation protection, both following an accidental release of radioactivity, and during the routine running of the nuclear industry. The papers can be divided into four broad categories - those directly addressing the medical response to nuclear accidents (5 papers), those concerned with the subject of leukaemias and low levels of radiation in the environment (six papers), those with the role of both operators and responsible government agencies in environmental protection (six papers), those with the role of both operators and responsible government agencies in environmental protection (six papers) and a miscellaneous group of two papers, one discussing the implications of recent risk estimate revisions, and the second giving a rather detailed discussion of priorities in radiobiological research in connection with radiation protection. For most readers with a general interest in events since Chernobyl, the papers on central and local government agency roles and responsibilities, in a response to an accidental release of radioactivity, will probably be the most useful. Here, in one volume, one can unravel the interconnections between DoE, DEn, MAFF, Scottish, Welsh, Northern Ireland Offices, Local Authorities and other bodies in the event of a release of radioactivity into our environment. Inevitably, there is some overlap between these papers, but their collective reading will provide a good overview of the general and specific roles of the various organizations. I believe it also may raise the question as to why there is a need for such a complicated infrastructure to an emergency response, especially at central government level. In view of the most significant effect of the Chernobyl accident on the UK (the contamination of sheep meat from certain upland areas) it is of interest that the otherwise very comprehensive paper on the role of MAFF in an emergency response mentions their use of computer models in the prediction of the agricultural effects of the aftermath of an accident - a point which may cause a few raised eyebrows seeing as it was precisely the failure, or lack of, a suitable model which led to much embarrassment within the Ministry following Chernobyl. Not unexpectedly, the Ministry's models are apparently being constantly updated, and it is assumed that their future use will go hand in hand with an appreciation of their limitations. Considerable discussion has been raging in recent years over the exact risk, in terms of cancers, to radiation; earlier estimates from Japan having been upwardly revised recently. The Director of the National Radiological Protection Board, Dr Roger Clarke, describes the reasons for these revisions of risk estimates for radiogenic cancers, and discusses the health implications for the accidents at Windscale, TMI and Chernobyl and calculates that the long-term effects on health are unlikely to be observable in any of the populations, except 221
222
Book Review
possibly amongst those evaculated from the immediate environs of Chernobyl. He concludes that the biggest problem facing those charged with dealing with future accidents is appropriate communication with the public. In this context, he calls for the wider use of "competent professionals" in any future response to a nuclear accident. Overall, the book has much to offer those from a very wide range of backgrounds with interests in the field of radiation protection, both administratively and scientifically. Practically all the papers have been compiled with an intelligent lay readership in mind and it would certainly be a good buy for both science and public libraries. Dr K. Mondon