Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011;9(3):301-12.
doi: 10.2203/dose-response.11-004.Scott. Epub 2011 Jun 16.

Assessing potential radiological harm to fukushima recovery workers

Affiliations

Assessing potential radiological harm to fukushima recovery workers

Bobby R Scott. Dose Response. 2011.

Abstract

A radiological emergency exists at the Fukushima Daiichi (Fukushima I) nuclear power plant in Japan as a result of the March 11, 2011 magnitude 9.0 earthquake and the massive tsunami that arrived later. News media misinformation related to the emergency triggered enormous social fear worldwide of the radioactivity that is being released from damaged fuel rods. The heroic recovery workers are a major concern because they are being exposed to mostly gamma radiation during their work shifts and life-threatening damage to the radiosensitive bone marrow could occur over time. This paper presents a way in which the bone marrow equivalent dose (in millisieverts), as estimated per work shift, could be used along with the hazard function model previously developed for radiological risk assessment to repeatedly check for potential life-threatening harm (hematopoietic system damage) to workers. Three categories of radiation hazard indication are proposed: 1, life-threatening damage unlikely; 2, life-threatening damage possible; 3, life-threatening damage likely. Categories 2 and 3 would be avoided if the whole body effective dose did not exceed the annual effective dose limit of 250 mSv. For down-wind populations, hormetic effects (activated natural protective processes) are much more likely than are deleterious effects.

Keywords: hormesis; radiological emergency; risk assessment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1.
FIGURE 1.
Predicted median lethal dose (D50(y)) for the hematopoietic mode of death for different mammals (Sprague-Dawley rats, white non-inbred mice, dogs, swine, goats, sheep, and humans) as a function of the external low-LET radiation dose rate y to bone marrow in Gy/h. Dose rate is presented as a categorical variable and is not aligned to tick marks.

Similar articles

References

    1. Ainsworth EJ, Leong GF, Kendal K, Alpen EL, Albright ML. Biological Effects of Neutron and Proton Irradiation. II. IAEA; Vienna, Austria: 1964. Pulsed irradiation studies in mice, rats and dogs; pp. 15–30.
    1. AFRRI (Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute) Chemical Protection Against X-Ray, Gamma, and Neutron Radiation. Bethesda, MD: 1997. AFFRI Contract Report 97-1,
    1. Feinendegen LE, Neumann RD, Pollycove M. Systems-related facts and consequences in assessing risk from low-level irradiation. Health Phys. 2011;100(3):274–276. (extended abstract) - PubMed
    1. IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) Medical Handling of Accidentally Exposed Individuals, Safety Series No. 88. IAEA; Viena, Austria: 1988.
    1. IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) Generic Procedures for Medical Responses during a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency. Report EPR-Medical (2005) IAEA; Vienna, Austria: 2005.

LinkOut - more resources