The way forward - the interdependence of controllable dose, collective dose and threshold dose, and its consequences

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Dear Sir The adoption of an individual-based philosopy in the proposed controllable-dose concept (Clarke 1999 Control of low-level radiation exposure: time for a change? J. Radiol. Prot. 19 107-15) along with the abandonment of collective dose, inherently implies the acceptance of a low-dose threshold in tumour induction - a consequence ICRP appears reluctant to acknowledge. Either low doses are relevent, or they are not. The economic consequences of the combination of a collective-dose and a no-threshold dose approach have now become apparent. Moreover, the trend towards lower and lower dose-limits over the years has led to a proximity between such limits and background radiation levels, which is questionable in view of variations in the latter. There may be some conflicting evidence as to the possible significance of low doses, but Roger Clarke's fresh approach is indeed welcome. This should also encompass the metrological aspects, where the potential confusion between some operational quantities and some dose-limiting quantities (e.g. between dose equivalent and equivalent dose) is manifestly evident. Yours faithfully,

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: