Intro: "The FDA is disingenuous in its attempt to compare the radiation from a major nuclear accident to radiation exposures in everyday life."

Robert Alvarez questions the FDA's comparison of radiation exposures every day to those in a major nuclear accident. (photo: Futurity.org)

The FDA and the Fukushima Fallout

By Robert Alvarez, Reader Supported News

02 April 11

he FDA is disingenuous in its attempt to compare the radiation from a major nuclear accident to radiation exposures in everyday life.

"Radiation is all around us in our daily lives, and these findings are a miniscule amount compared to what people experience every day. For example, a person would be exposed to low levels of radiation on a round trip cross country flight, watching television, and even from construction materials," said Patricia Hansen, an FDA senior scientist.

No matter how small the dose might be, it is disingenuous to compare an exposure to a specific radioisotope that is released by a major nuclear accident, with radiation exposures in everyday life. The FDA spokesperson should have informed the public that radioiodine provides a unique form of exposure in that it concentrates rapidly in dairy products and in the human thyroid. The dose received, based on official measurements, may be quite small, and pose an equally small risk. However, making a conclusion on the basis of one measurement is fragmentary at best and unscientific at worst. As the accident in Fukushima continues to unfold, the public should be provided with all measurements made of radioactive fallout from the Fukushima reactors to allow for independent analyses.

Moreover, the FDA has been asleep at the switch when it comes to protecting public health from medical radiation exposures. According to the National Council on Radiation Protection, radiation exposures to the American public from medical devices and source, which FDA regulates, has soared by nearly 600 percent since 1982. In 2002, the NCRP estimated that the public received an extra 53 millirem (0.53 mSv) per person per year from medical radiation sources.* In 2006, the NCRP estimates that this dose has jumped to 300 millirem(3mSv) - nearly three times the annual dose allowed by the US EPA from nuclear facilities.

The single largest contributor responsible for half of this dose to the American public is from Computed Tomography or CT Scans, whose use has skyrocketed over the past several years. According to a study in the Archives of Internal Medicine, as many approximately 29,000 future cancers could be related to CT scans performed in 2007 alone.* FDA has yet to comment on how this may be affecting the health of the American public in everyday life.

* Registration required to read article.

Comments

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

-8 # Roger H Green 2011-04-03 06:23

I have worked on the environmental side of radiation (as well as other contaminants) all my professional life, and I have to say that it is Alvarez' article (especially the lead sentence) that is disingenuous. In fact it is normal and scientific to remind laymen that we live in natural background radiation, and that exposure is a quantitative thing. It is to counter alarmist pieces such as this one that such reminders are necessary. Alvarez says that "making a conclusion on the basis of one measurement is fragmentary at best and unscientific at worst. - - the public should be provided with all measurements made of radioactive fallout from the Fukushima reactors to allow for independent analyses." Who is making a conclusion based on one measurement? What a straw man! Scientists from many countries are making measurements. Scientists & media can access those data and do "independent analyses" (?). Non-scientists wouldn't know where to begin, so the FDA providing the public with "all measurements", without context, would only alarm people to no point. Scientifically Alvarez is approximately correct about radioactive iodine but I have had no problem finding information about that re. the Japan scenario, and I doubt that anyone else has either. As for CT scans, I am not an expert on that so I will not say any more. Alvarez should have written this with the same attitude.

+16 # John Karvel 2011-04-03 07:46

If I understand Helen Caldicott correctly the issue is the difference between radiation hitting cells from outside the body versus from inside the body. Once a radioactive material is taken in the body the effects of the radiation are greatly magnified. Alpha radiation which doesn't penetrate the skin produces cancerous cells from within the thyroid or bone marrow. The cancer can then take 2 to 60 years to express itself. See the medical literature on "internal emitters". Comparing the effects the radiation of internal emitters to external emitters (like x-rays) is inaccurate. If the FDA doesn't make this distinction their analysis of the danger is grossly underestimated.

+9 # Chrys Ostrander 2011-04-03 17:27

On March 30, WA Gov. Chris Gregoire, my governor, said in a press release “According to [EPA/FDA], a pint of milk at these levels [of iodine 131] would expose an individual to less radiation than would a five hour airplane flight."

Comparing internal exposure to iodine 131 gamma emitting particles ingested with food (or inhaled) to the radiation exposure you get in an airplane is, in my opinion, comparing apples and oranges. It's patently unscientific. It's a political statement, and an irresponsible one at that. You don't ingest radioactive particles on an airplane. To anyone who thinks these levels of contamination are too small to worry about, ask the lung cell, or the colon cell that's unlucky enough to be the one that the gamma radiation-emitting iodine 131 particle sidles up to. That cell is getting blasted and its chromosomes are being damaged. Will it turn into a cancer cell? Maybe. This is the basis for scientific concern about radioactive iodine in food. If your whole body was exposed to the level of radiation that cells near an iodine 131 particle are getting, you would likely die on the spot, or within days. It's NOT too small to worry about. It's not like on an airplane.

+7 # theshift33 2011-04-03 19:33

The bottom line is that it is all about the money. Regardless of the nuclear dangers which is a no brainer we have the FDA which is a compromised institution of government in tandem with the medical/pharmaceutical/food complex where A CURE IS NOT WANTED! Without chronic ongoing illness there would be a drastic drop in profits for these industries. Look at the additives that are put in our food and personal care products that are banned in Canada & Europe. These conglomerates have bills in Washington to take over everything from seeds, organic foods, herbal remedies and alternative medicine as we speak. Farmers are now policed by the conglomerates that own GMO seeds and if there are any violations they are sued and put out of business. Hows that for democracy!

+2 # FreakyTiki 2011-04-04 11:11

I'm sorry but any time our government or their corporate shills at the FDA say, "Move along people. Nothing to see here. Everything is A-Ok and you have nothing to fear. Experts have everything under control." That's when I grab my butt and run for the hills.
About the only thing I feel we can count on is that the "Powers That Be" lie to "We The People" on a constant basis.

Refresh comments list
RSS feed for comments to this post.

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.