LIVING WITH

RADIATION

~ a d i o l o g protection
~z Board
Preface

Living with Radiation may seem an ironic title

for a book about protection against radiation,
but we have to live with many types of
harmful radiations either because they cannot
be avoided or because they have become
essential to our way of life. In any case, the
title has been hallowed by usage: this is
the fifth edition of the book. I am grateful to
the members of staff who put it together.

Our task at NRPB is to protect people from

the hazards of ionising and non-ionising
radiations. We achieve this in a number of ways,
by conducting research, providing support
and services, and giving advice to those who
make policy in government and elsewhere.

Another side of our work is to provide

information on radiation. This book is part
of the strategy. M y hope is that it may be
of interest to many readers - to teachers,
journalists, environmentalists, lawyers,
doctors, industrialists, officials, and
politicians. M y wish is that it will improve
knowledge of radiation.

Roger Ckxrhe
DIRECT01
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

7 Medical uses of ionising radiation 29

Contents D~agnost~c radiology
-
Nuclear medicine
Radiotherapy
Preface lil
Reference doses
Total doses
1 lntroductidn 1
Types of radiation 8 Occupational expc .e ro
Benefits and risks ionising radiation
Public anxiety Art~fic~al
sources
Natural sources
2 Concepts and quantities Total doses
Structure of matter
Radloact~v~ty and rad~atlon 9 Environmental pollution
lonlsat~onIn matter Weapons tests
lonlsat~onIn tlssue Chernobyl accident
Dose quantltles Rad~oactlvedischarges
Total doses
3 Sources of ionising radiation 11
10 Nuclear power
4 Effects of ionising radiation 13 Nuclear reactors
Induction of cancers Waste management
Risk assessments Decommissioning
Risk factors for cancers Disposal criteria
Hereditary disease
Communal risk 1 1 Nuclear emergencies
Other late effects Countermeasures
Irradiation in pregnancy Emergency arrangements
Intervention standards
5 System of radiological protection Minor incidents
General pr~nc~ples
Scope of appllcatlon 12 Electromagnetic fields and
Justlficat~onof practices radiation
Optlm~satronof protectron Common sources
Llmltatlon of doses Immediate effects
Constraints Delayed effects
Comparing r~sks
Legal controls 13 Optical radiation
Ultraviolet radiation
6 Natural ionising radiation Other optical radiations
Cosm~crad~at~on
Gamma rad~at~on Appendices
Radon ~nhalatlon A Glossary
Internal lrradlatlon B Symbols and units
Total doses C NRPB publications
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

1 Introduction

Types of radiation
Radiation is a fact of life. Light and heat from We make considerable use of both lonrslng 1
the sun are natural forms of radiation and non-lonlslng rad~atlonshowever introduction
essent~alto our existence. There are also Artlfic~alradlatlons have led to dramatlc
other forms, which we generate in everyday advances In med~cald~agnos~s and treatment
life, such as microwaves for cooking, and are used for a wlde range of procedures dl'@
radiowaves for communication, radar for In Industry, agriculture, and research @is&
navigation, and X-rays for medical Nevertheless, they can be harmful to human
examinations. Radioactive materials also belngs, and people must be protected from
emit radiation. These materials occur unnecessary or excesslve exposures
naturally throughout the environment, but
The greatest concern about lonlslng radlat~on
we have also produced others artificially.
stems from the way In whlch ~tcan cause
We can classify radiation according to the malignant d~seasesIn people exposed to ~t
effects it produces on matter. There are and ~nherlteddefects In later generations
two categories, ionising and non-ionising
radiations. lonising radiation includes cosmic
rays, X-rays, and the radiation from radioactive
materials. Non-ionisingradiation includes
ultraviolet light, radiant heat, radiowaves,
and microwaves.

We can also classify radiation in terms of its

origin as natural radiation or artificial radiation.

Benefits and risks

The benefits from natural non-ionising
radiation, mainly heat and light from the sun,
are enormous, but there are no clear benefits
from exposure to natural ionising radiation.
- . -- - - - - -- -- -
I .- _ . _ .--- The terms in italics are e x e n- -e-d.-in later chaptern- as well
-- - - .- - .
as in the g~ossc~ry~ I
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

The likelihood of such effects depends on the

amount of radiation that a person receives:
this is equally true whether the radiation is
natural or artificial. So in circumstances that we
can control, we need to make a careful balance
between the risks and the benefits of the
procedures that expose people to radiation.

The effects of non-lonlslng rad~at~on depend

on the type and rntenslty of the rad~at~on
N o n - ~ o n ~ s rad~atlon
~ng can damage the skln
and the eyes, ~f~tpenetrates body tlssues, rt
can damage rnternal organs by heatlng them
In the long term, exposure to ultrav~olet
1
radlat~onmay cause sk~ncancer and cataracts
lntroQUction
Aga~nwe need measures to protect people
from such effects
Public anxiety
Public anxiety
As the effects of ron~srngand non-lonlslng
rad~at~ons have become better understood
durlng recent decades, a system of rad~olog~cal rad~bt~lc-
protect~onhas been developed to protect and 10s-
warnirz
people from sources of rad~atlonThe subject
of rad~at~on safety recelves much attentron In
our socrety partly because rad~at~on 1s one
cause, among many, of cancer. Moreover, our
senses cannot detect most forms of radiation;
this undoubtedly adds to our anxiety.

Another reason for general concern may be

the lack of reliable and accessible information
about radiation. The aim of this book is to
help by providing information for those who
are not experts. In the following chapters, we
describe the sources and effects of radiation
of all types and explain the principles and
practices of radiological protection.
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
2 Concepts and
quantities
Structure of matter
Studies in physics and chemistry during the
last two centuries have revealed that all matter
consists of atoms. These are the basic
building blocks of the elements such as
hydrogen, carbon, oxygen, iron, and lead.
Each atom contains a tiny central positively
charged nucleus and a number of electrons.
The electrons carry negative electric charge
and move around the nucleus in clouds - or
shells as they are called - with loosely
defined boundaries. The nucleus is typically
I0 000 times smaller than the electron
clouds and the electrons themselves are
too small in size to measure. This means
that the atom is mainly empty and difficult
to depict except in diagrams which are
largely schematic.
Tor . l Protons @ Electrons @ Neutrons
carbon
2
The nucleus of the atom conta~nsprotons,which Csncepts and
carry a posltlve charge equal to the electrons' quantities
negatlve charge, and neutrons, whlch carry no
charge at all (We do not need to concern Structure of
ourselves here wlth the more fundamental
matter
structure of protons and neutrons) Each atom
contalns equal numbers of protons and
electrons and is therefore electrically neutral
Atoms of the same or d~fferentelements can,
however, comb~neto form larger, uncharged
entlt~escalled molecules For example, 2 atoms
of oxygen form 1 molecule of oxygen, and
2 atoms of hydrogen comb~new ~ t h1 atom of
oxygen to form 1 molecule of water
The number of protons In the nucleus, called
the atomlc number; gives an element its
unlque character~st~cs the atornlc number of
carbon IS 6, for Instance, whereas for lead lt
1s 82 Most of an atom's mass 1s concentrated
In the nucleus, and the total number of protons
plus neutrons 1s called the mass number
S~ncethe number of electrons equals the
number of protons, we can spec~fyan atomlc
specles by the number of protons and
neutrons ~tcontalns Moreover, since the
number of protons 1s unlque to each
element, we can s~mplyuse the name of the
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

element together with the mass number to

specify each species or nuclide. So carbon-1 2
is a nuclide with 6 protons plus 6 neutrons.
-
a decay
'
,

Lead-208, for comparison, is a nuclide with

82 protons and 126 neutrons.
Radioactive
Nuclides of an element that have the same decay chain
number of protons but different numbers of for
neutrons are called isotopes of that element. umnium-238
Hydrogen, for instance, has three isotopes:

5
hydrogen-I (common hydrogen with a
nucleus of only 1 proton), hydrogen-2 called different form of beta decay:
deuterium (1 proton and 1 neutron), and they lose positive charge
hydrogen-3 called tritium (1 proton and *I through the emission of a
2 positron, which is a positively
2 neutrons). Iron has 10 isotopes from
Concepts ) charged electron
iron-52 to iron-61,all with the 26 protons
and
quantities
that characterise the element. 58261The transformations often leave the
nucleus with excess energy which it
1 ) loses as gamma rays - high energy
Radioactivity photons which are discrete parcels of
and energy without mass or charge.
These processes and similar ones are
radiation
what we call radioactivity. The act of
transformation is termed decay and the
nuclide that changes and emits radiation is
called a radionuclide.
fi

Many radionuclides occur in nature.

I I
Most carbon, for instance, is in the form of
carbon-12 with 6 protons and 6 neutrons
Radioactivity and radlaL I
and is completely stable. Interactions in the
Although many nuclides are stable, most are
atmosphere with cosmic rays can, however,
not, stability being determined mainly by the
produce 4 , a radionuclide consisting
number of neutrons and protons they
of 6 protons and 8 neutrons. Carbon-14,
contain. Smaller stable nuclei have about
with its extra neutrons, decays by changing a
equal numbers: larger stable nuclei have
neutron to a proton and emitting a beta
more neutrons than protons. Nuclei with too
particle: in this way, the nuclide transforms to
many neutrons tend to transform themselves
nitrogen-14, which consists of 7 protons and
to a more stable structure by converting a
7 neutrons. Measuring these decays in
neutron to a proton: this process, known as
carbon-bearing materials is the basis of the
beta decay, involves the emission of a
technique of carbon dating.
negatively charged electron called a beta
particle. Nuclei with too many protons Other naturally occurring radionuclides are
convert the excess protons to neutrons in a formed in sequences or series of decays that
q
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
- = r v - - - 2
rn%&aFc
, m r - *
I T V T 7
+ -*
orlglnate from the elements uranrum and
thorlum Each of these serles ends wlth a
stable nucl~deof lead, but they also pass
through rad~onucl~des of other famlllar
elements The dlagram on p4 shows the
decay serles from uranlum-238 endlng In the
stable nucl~delead-206 ~tpasses through
the radlonucl~deradon-222 whlch 1s of
spec~als~gnlficanceIn rad~ologlcalprotection
Some of the decays In the senes, for example
the decays of radlum-226 and polon~um-214,
produce an alpha particle conslstlng of
2 protons and 2 neutrons ldent~calwlth a
nucleus of hehum, the alpha part~cle1s
much heavler than the beta partlcle and
carries two units of positive charge.
The energy of these forms of rad~at~on-
alpha and beta partcles and gamma rays
- is usually expressed In the unit of
nlnrtrnn ~ , n l tm r m h n l n\l
C I C L L I UII V U I L , >yl I lUUl L V.
hA8 ~ l t l n l n rn f
IVIUILIIJIC>
th~su n ~are
t often used such as a mllllon or
1 O6 electron volts, symbol MeV For ~nstance,
the energy of alpha particles emltted by
polon~um-214IS about 7 7 MeV Beta
part~clesfrom lead-214, also formed In the
uranium-238 decay series, have a maximum
energy of 1 .O MeV, and gamma rays produced
by it have energies up to 0.35 MeV.
During the past few decades, several
hundred radioactive isotopes (radioisotopes)
of natural elements have been produced
artlficlally ~ncludlng,
for example, stront~um-90,
caes~um-1 37 and lodlne-1 31 Several new
2
radloact~veelements have also been produced
Concepts
In quantity, for Instance prometh~umand
pluton~um,although the latter does occur and
naturally In trace amounts In uranlum ores quantities
1
Radipactive decay
chain far
thorium-232
3.67d
The rate at which spontaneous
U 1
transformations occur in a given amount
55.5- of a radioactive material is known as it
activity. Activity is expressed in a unit
called the becquerel, symbol Bq, where
1 Bq equals one transformation per
second. As the unit is so small, multiples
of the becquerel are frequently used,
such as the megabecquerel, MBq, which
is 1 million becquerels. One gram of
plutonium-239, for instance, has an
activity of approximately 2000 MBq: it
Henri Becquerel
emits about 2000 million alpha particles ( 1 852- 19081
each second. The becquerel is named after
the French physlclst Henri Becquerel.
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

The time taken for the activity of a Ionisation in matter

radionuclide to fall to half its original value is When radiation passes through matter, it
called the half-life, symbol t i l l ; expressed deposits energy in the material concerned
otherwise, this is the time for half the nuclei Alpha and beta particles, being electrically
in a sample to decay. Each radionuclide has charged, deposit energy through electrical
a unique half-life: interactions with electrons in the material.
Gamma rays and X-rays lose energy in a
iodine-1 31 , 8 days;
variety of ways, but each involves liberating
caesium-137, 30 years;
atomic (orbiting] electrons which then deposit
carbon-14, 5730 years;
energy in interactions with other electrons.
plutonium-239, 24 thousand years;
Neutrons also lose energy in various ways, an
uranium-238, 4470 million years.
important means being through collisions
Values for various radionuclides range from with hydrogen nuclei, which are single
2 fractions of a second to billions of years. protons: the protons are set in motion and,
Con@p& In successive half-lives, the activity of a being charged, they again deposit energy
and radionuclide is reduced by decay to 112, '14, 118, through electrical interactions. So in all cases,
' I l 6 and so on of its initial value. This means the radiation ultimately produces electrical
quantities
that we can predict the activity remaining at interactions in the material.
any future time. As the amount of a
In some cases, an electron in the material
radionuclide decreases, the radiation emitted
may receive enough energy to escape from
decreases proportionately.
an atom leaving the atom and the molecule
thus formed positively charged. The figure
illustrates this process for a molecule of
water. The molecule has 10 protons altogether,
but only 9 atomic electrons remain after a
; charged particle passes by, the molecule
' L

le4
as a whole is thereby left w ~ t h1 excess
I 1 positive charge.
- nalFlna 4 k~rptrio
1 5 -
' a I, marl a r ; g v ~ y ,
r . . i r z - - -
Two other forms of rad~at~on that requlre .",-6. atom
special mention are X-rays and neutrons (n]
X-rays are usually produced by bombarding
a metal target with electrons In a vacuum.
They have propert~ess~milarto those of 6
gamma
- ravs but usually lower energies and
so are less penetrating: an ordinary X-ray
machine in a hospital emits X-rays with
energies up to 0.15 MeV or so. Neutrons, a
'ydrogen atom
constituent of the nucleus, are produced in
large numbers mainly in nuclear reactors, as
discussed in Chapter 10.
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

The process by whlch a neutral atom or When ronlslng radlat~onpasses though

molecule becomes charged IS called lon~satlon cellular tlssue, ~tproduces charged water
and the resultlng entlty an /on Once molecules These break up into entlt~escalled
removed from an atom, an electron may In free rad~calssuch as the free hydroxyl rad~cal
turn ronrse other atoms or molecules OH composed of an oxygen atom and a
Any rad~atlonthat causes lonlsat~on- ether hydrogen atom. Free radlcals are hlghly
dlrectly as wlth alpha and beta part~cles reactlve chemically and can alter Important
or ~ndlrectlyas wlth gamma rays, X-rays, and molecules In the cell
neutrons - IS known as lonlslng rad~at~on
One particularly Important molecule IS
Charged particles passlng through atoms may
deoxyr~bonucle~c acld, DNA, found malnly In
also glve energy to the atom~celectrons
the nucleus of the cell DNA controls the
wlthout actually removing them, thls process
structure and functlon of the cell and passes
IS called excltatlon
on coples of Itself ~ t smolecules are large and
Ionisation in tissue
Each tlme a charged partlcle lonlses or excltes
an atom, ~tloses energy unt~llt no longer has and
enough energy to interact, the final result of quantities
these energy losses IS to ralse the temperature
of the mater~almlnutely In thls way, all the
energy depos~tedIn brologlcal tlssues by
lonlslng radlat~onIS eventually d~ss~pated as
heat through Increased v~brat~ons of the atomlc
and molecular structures It IS the lnltlal
lonlsat~onand the resultlng chem~calchanges
that cause harmful b~ologlcaleffects

The baslc unlt of blologlcal tlssue 1s the cell,

wh~chhas a control centre - as ~twere -
called the nucleus The nucleus of a cell
IS an lntr~catestructure and not to be
confused wlth the nucleus of an atom About
80% of the cell conslsts of water, the other
20% belng complex blologlcal compounds

Cell wall

Cell nucle
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

the structures that carry them, chromosomes, taken into the body through breathing or
are visible through the microscope. We still eating or through a skin wound. Beta particles
do not fully understand the ways in which may penetrate a centimetre or so of tissue, so
radiation damages cells but many involve radionuclides that emit them are hazardous
changes to the DNA. There are two ways in to superficial tissues but not to internal organs
which this can happen. Radiation may ionise unless they too are taken into the body. For
a DNA molecule leading directly to a chemical indirectly ionising radiations such as gamma
change, or the DNA may be changed rays and neutrons, the degree of penetration
indirectly when it interacts with a free radical depends on the nature of the interactions
produced in the water of the cell by the with tissue. Camma rays can pass through
radiation. In either case, the chemical change the body, so radionuclides that emit them
can cause a harmful biological effect leading may be hazardous whether on the outside or
to the development of cancers or ~nherited the inside. X-rays and neutrons can also pass
2 genet~cdefects. Chapter 4 has more detail through the body.
Concepts on these matters.
and Dose quantities
We cannot detect ionising radiations directly
quantities
through our senses, but we can detect and
measure them by other means: these include
Dose older methods based on photographic films,
quantities Geiger-Muller tubes, and scintillation
counters as well as newer techniques using
thermoluminescent materials and silicon
diodes. We can interpret the measurements
we make in terms of the energy that the
radiation concerned would have deposited
throughout the human body or in a particular
part of the body. When direct measurements
A most important property of the various
are not possible - when, for instance, a
ionising radiations is their ability to penetrate
radionuclide is deposited in an internal organ
matter. The depth of penetration for a
- we can calculate the dose absorbed by that
particular type of radiation increases with
organ provided that we know
energy but varles from one type of rad~ation
the activity in the organ.
to another for the same energy. W ~ t hcharged
part~clessuch as alpha and beta part~cles, The amount of energy that
the depth of penetration also depends on ionising radiation deposits in
the mass of the particle and ~ t scharge for a unit mass of matter, such as
equal energies, a beta particle w~llpenetrate human tissue, is called the
to a much greater depth than an alpha absorbed dose; it is expressed
particle. Indeed alpha particles can scarcely in a unit called the gray,
penetrate the dead, outer layer of human symbol Cy, where 1 gray is
skin; consequently, radionuclides that emit equal to 1 joule per kilogram. ,
them are not hazardous unless they are Submultiples of the gray are naro~atiray ( 1 90s- 19E5
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

often used, such as the milligray, mCy, which Defined in this way, the equivalent dose
is one-thousandth of a gray. The gray is named provides an index of the risk of harm to a
after the English physicist Harold Gray. particular tissue or organ from exposure to
various radiations regardless of their type or
lonising radiations differ in the way in which
energy. So 1 Sv of alpha radiation to the lung,
they interact with biological materials, so
for example, would create the same risk of
that equal absorbed doses (meaning equal
inducing fatal lung cancer as 1 Sv of beta
amounts of energy deposited) do not
radiation. The risk to the various parts of the
necessarily have equal biological effects. For
human body varies from organ to organ: for
instance, 1 Gy to tissue from alpha radiation
example, the risk of fatal malignancy per unit
is more harmful than 1 Gy from beta radiation
equivalent dose is lower for the thyroid than
because an alpha particle, being slower and
for the lung. Moreover, there are other
more heavily charged, loses its energy much
important types of harm such as non-fatal
more densely along its path. So in order to
cancers or the risk of serious hereditary 2
put all ionising radiations on an equal basis
damage caused by irradiation of the testes Concepts
with regard to their potential for causing
or ovaries. These effects are different both in and
harm, we need another quantity. This is the
kind and in magnitude and we must take
equivalent dose. It is expressed in a unit quantities
them into account when assessing - the overall
called the sievert, symbol Sv.
detr~mentto the health of human be~ngs
Equivalent dose is equal to the absorbed aris~ngfrom exposure to radiation. DW
dose multiplied by a factor that takes
$t~Q6iti@
account of the way in which a particular
radiation distributes energy in tissue so that
we can allow for its relative effectiveness in
causing biological harm. For gamma rays, IlUvl

X-rays, and beta particles, this radiation

weighting factor is set at 1, so the absorbed
dose and equivalent dose are numerically
equal. For alpha particles, the factor is set at
20, so that the equivalent dose is deemed
to be 20 times the absorbed dose. Values of * *
the radiation weighting
factor for neutrons of
various energies range
from 5 to 20. Submultiples
of the sievert are
commonly used, such as
the millisievert, mSv, which
is one-thousandthof
a sievert. The sievert is La a19
named after the Swedish We can deal wlth all these complexltles
physicist Rolf Sievert. by taking the equivalent dose In each of the
Rolf Sievert (1 896-19661 major tissues and organs of the body arld
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

multiplying it by a weighting factor related to 5 8 million, the collective effective dose to

the risk associated with that tissue or organ. the whole community is the product of these
The sum of these weighted equivalent doses two numbers - about 1 5 0 0 0 0 man sievert,
is a quantity called the effective dose: i t allows symbol manSv.
us to represent the various dose equivalents
It is common for effective dose to be
in the body as a single number. Generally,
abbreviated to dose and collective effective
the effective dose gives a broad indication of
dose to collective dose. This will be the
the detriment to health from any exposure
case in the following chapters except where
to ionising radiation regardless of the energy
exactness is essential.
and type of radiation; moreover, it applies
-
-
-
equally to external and internal exposure
and to uniform or non-uniform irradiatior
a
2 M
P-*=mm#s*&&s gs
Concepfs Absorbed dose : ~ ~ ~f f 3 tg ~ ~ t ~ f
Energy ~mpartedby rad~atlonto unlt mass4 8 ,
and
quantities

Dose
quantities

The calculation shows that the

harmful effects from this particular pattern
of radiation exposure will be the same
as the risk from 18.5 mSv received
uniformly throughout the whole body.

- - - - - ' . m ~ t a 1 a a
I ', n l C ~ " . ~ I I I H ~ , . r r r r .
- a & - -

It IS somet~mesuseful to have a measure of

the total radiat~ondose to groups of people
or a whole populatlon. The quantlty used to
express t h ~ stotal 1s the collect~veeffectlve
dose it IS obtalned by summlng over all
groups the product of the average effectlve
dose to the group from the radiation source
of Interest and the number of people In
that group. For example, the effective dose
from all sources of radlat~onIS, on average,
2 6 mSv In a year to the lnhab~tantsof the
UK Since the populatlon of the UK IS about
B
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
3 Sources of
ionising radiation
lonising radiation enters our lives in a variety
of ways. It arises from natural processes, such
as the decay of uranium in the earth, and from
artificial procedures, as with the use of X-rays
in medicine. So we can classify radiation
according to its origin. Natural sources
include cosmic rays, gamma rays from the
earth, radon decay products in the air, and
various radionuclides in food and drink.
Artificial sources include medical X-rays,
fallout from the testing of nuclear weapons in
the atmosphere, discharges of radioactive
waste from the nuclear industry, industrial
gamma rays, and miscellaneous items such
as consumerproducts. Later chapters have
more information on both classes of source.
Each source of radiation has two important
characteristics, the dose that it delivers to
human beings and the ease with which we
can intervene to affect such doses. Until
recently, radiation from natural sources
seemed unremarkable and unalterable -
a background phenomenon. We now know,
however, that doses in the home from the
decay products of radon gas (itself a product
of uranium decay) can be remarkably high,
although it is fairly easy to reduce them in
existing homes and to avoid them when
building new homes. By and large, we cannot
3
change our exposure to the other natural
sources: this basic background of cosmic rays,
Sources of
gamma rays, and natural radioactivity within ionising
the body gives rise to an annual dose around radiation
1 mSv, on average, in the UK. A comparable . ....
dose from radon decay products is also un-
avoidable, although it is important to eliminate
exposure to the highest individual doses.
It is easier, in most cases, to control artificial
sources of radiation because we can
intervene to alter or terminate the procedure
producing the radiation, but there is always
a balance to be made. It would be unwise, for
instance, to reduce doses from X-ray
examinations if this were to lead to a loss of
essential medical information.
NRPB regularly publishes data on doses from
all sources: the results of the latest review are
reflected in the piechart. The annual dose,
averaged over the whole population, is about
2.6mSv in total. Some 85% of this total is
from natural sources with over half from
radon decay products in the home. Medical
exposure of patients accounts for 14% of the
total, whereas all other artificial sources -
fallout, consumer products, occupational
exposure, and discharges from the nuclear
industry - account for about 0.5% of the
total value.
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

Contribut~unsto
average dose
~nthe UK

3
sources
of ionising
radiation r m ~ J U C<O.i%
~S
~zcharges<O.l%
allo out 0.2%
Occupational 0.3%

The greatest variations in dose arise from

radon decay products in the home, which can
give annual doses as high as 100 mSv. Annual
doses at work are at present limited by law
to 50mSv, but in fact only about 1% of the
workforce exceeds 1 5 mSv and almost all of
the dose comes from exposure to radon in the
workplace. It is unlikely that many members
of the public receive more than a fraction of
1 mSv in a year from incidental exposure to
artificial sources. Doses to patients in some
diagnostic procedures may be around 10 mSv,
but these are related to medical procedures.
For consumer products that contain
radioactive material, such as smoke alarms
and luminous watches, annual doses are at
most 1 pSv (1 millionth of a sievert), although
thoriated gas mantles may cause as much as
0. I mSv in a year in certain circumstances.
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
4 Effects of
ionising radiation
The effects of lonlsing rad~at~on soon appear
fa person recelves a suff~clentrad~at~on
dose Avery h~ghdose to the whole body
can cause death wlthln a matter of weeks for
example, an absorbed dose of 5Cy or more
recerved instantaneously would probably be
lethal, unless treatment were glven, because
of damage to the bone marrow and the
gastrointestinal tract. If the same dose were
instead restricted to a limited area of the
body, it might not prove fatal but other early
effects could occur: an instantaneous
absorbed dose of 5 Cy or more to the skin
would probably cause erythema within a
week or so; higher doses would lead to more
serious damage. Similar doses to the testes
or ovaries might cause sterility.
If the same total dose were received over a
period of weeks or months, there would be
more opportunity for body cells to repair
and there might be no early signs of injury.
E@Wm/
&fl@ge
4
Even In the absence of early srgns, however,
tlssues could st111have been damaged with
Effects of
the effects becomlng man~festonly later in ionising
l~feor perhaps in the lrrad~atedperson's radiation
descendants The most rmportant of these
late effects 1s cancer, wh~ch1s always serlous af
ffid&&i~fl
and frequently fatal
x%?rnrn
Induction of cancers
Although the cause of most cancers remalns
unknown or poorly understood, exposures to
agents such as tobacco smoke, asbestos,
ultrav~oletrad~at~on,and ionislng radiat~on
are known to Induce them The development
of cancer IS a complex cellular process In
several stages that usually takes many years
Radlat~onappears to act pr~ncipallyat the
ln~tlat~onstage by rnduclng certain mutations
in the DNA of normal cells in tissues. These
mutations allow a cell to enter a pathway of
abnormal growth that can sometimes lead to
the development of a malignancy.
In recent years, we have learned a great deal
about the process by whlch radlatlon exposure
leads to DNA damage and also about the
cellular systems that act to repair or mlsreparr
such damage and the mutations that may
arlse Coupled with ~mprovedknowledge rn
cancer biology, thls ~nformat~on prov~des
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
supporting ev~dencefor the long-standing
bel~efthat, although the rlsk of cancer after
low doses of rad~at~on may be very small,
there IS no dose - no matter how low - at
whlch we can completely d~scountrlsk
We therefore assume the rlsk of cancer to
Increase In proportion wlth an Increase In
rad~at~on dose
These advances In knowledge also lndlcate
that a person's genetlc constltutlon Influences
the r~skof cancer after lrrad~at~onAt present,
we can ldentlfy only rare famllles who may
carry Increased risk, but experts may In future
be able to take some account of such lnherlted
tralts ~nradlolog~calprotection pract~ce
How can we calculate the r ~ s kof cancer from
exposure to radlat1on7Suppose that we
know the number of people ~nan lrrad~ated
group and the doses they have recelved
Then by obsewlng the occurrence of cancer
In the group and analyslng ~tIn relatlon to
the doses and the number of cancers
expected In an otherw~seslmllar but
un~rrad~ated group, we can est~matethe
ralsed rlsk of cancer per u n ~dose,
t thls 1s
commonly called a nsk factor It IS most
Important to Include data for large groups
of people In these calculat~onsso as to
mlnlmlse the statlstlcal uncertalntles ~nthe
estlmates and take account of factors, such as
age and gender, that affect the spontaneous
development of cancer.
Not all cancers are fatal Mortality from
rad~at~on-~nduced thyro~dcancer 1s about lo%,
from breast cancer about 50%,and from skln
cancer about 1 % Overall, the r~skof lnduclng
cancer by un~formlylrradlatlng the whole
body IS about half as great agaln as the r~sk
of lnduclng a fatal cancer In radlolog~cal
protectlon the r ~ s kof fatal cancer 1s of more
concern because of ~ t sextreme slgnlficance
The use of fatal cancer rlsks also makes ~t
easler to compare them wlth the other fatal
r~sksencountered ~nIlfe; In contrast,
comparisons of non-fatal r~sksare fraught
wlth dlfflculty
Risk assessments
The maln source of information on the
additional rlsk of cancer following exposure
of the whole body to gamma rad~at~on
comes from studles on the survivors of the
atomic bombs dropped at Hlroshlma and
Nagasak~In 1 945 Other rlsk estlmates for the
exposure of var~oustlssues and organs to X-rays
and gamma rays come from people exposed
to external rad~at~on for the treatment of
non-mal~gnantor mal~gnantcondlt~onsand
for d~agnostlcpurposes and also from people
In the Marshall Islands exposed to severe
fallout from atmospher~cnuclear weapons
tests lnformatlon on the effects of alpha-
emlttlng radlonucl~descomes from mlners
exposed to radon and its decay products,
from workers exposed to rad~um-226in
lumlnous paint, from some pat~entstreated
wlth radlum-224 for bone dlsease, and from
other pat~entsglven an X-ray contrast medlum
contalnlng thorlum ox~de
lnformatlon of thls nature 1s assessed
per~od~callyby the Unlted Nat~onsSc~entlfic
Committee on the Effects of Atom~cRad~at~on
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

(UNSCEAR),the International Commission on overestimate of the risk at low levels. Curve C,

Radiological Protection (ICRP),the US National which is extrapolated from the slope of curve A
Academy of Sciences Committee on the at low levels, gives the best indication of the
~iologicalEffects of Ionizing Radiation [BEIR relationship between dose and risk for
Committee),and by NRPB. Such assessments ordinary circumstances of exposure to gamma
yield estimates of risk that are heavily rays. In short, the ratio of the slopes of B and
dependent on data from the Life Span Study C is the reduction factor that must be applied
of the atomic bomb survivors as supplemented to the original data to get the appropriate
by data from the other study groups. Since a risk factor.
substantial proportion of those who survived
ICRP has estimated the risk factors for fatal
the bombings in 1945 is still alive more than
cancers in this way using a judicious reduction
five decades later, it is necessary to predict
factor of 2. The calculations are for a
how many excess cancers will have been
representative international population 4
found by the time all the survivors have died.
based on the characteristics of five disparate
Various mathematical methods are used for Effects of
national populations.
this purpose; the process introduces some ionising
uncertainty ln the r~skestrmates The estimates, usually grven In sc~entlfic
radiation
notatron, may be expressed In other ways
Risk factors for cancers 5 0 x 1 0-2Svl, for example, IS the same as
Cancer rlsks derlved from the Japanese 5% per Sv or 1 ~n20 per Sv Thrs 1s the Ilfe-
atomic bomb survivors and other exposed tlme rlsk of contracting fatal cancer from unit
groups are based largely on hrgh doses cumulat~vedose of radlatlon The rlsk factor
recelved durlng short perlods In ordrnary
circumstances, most people are exposed to
low levels of radlatlon throughout long
perlods The central assumption rn radrological
A 1
protectron IS that there 1s a proportlonal
relatronshrp between dose and rlsk For some
hrghly lonlslng radlatlons, such as alpha
partrcles, the relatlonshlp rs dlrectly proportlonal
or h e a r In contrast, wlth sparsely lonlslng
radlat~onssuch as gamma rays, for example,
5
there IS considerable evldence from the B
study of radloblology that the rlsk IS less at
low doses and low dose rates than 1s lmplred
by h e a r ~nterpolatlonfrom hlgh doses and
hlgh dose rates

The posltlon IS illustrated In the dragram where

the data pornts are at hrgh levels Curve A
shows the l~kelynature of the relatlonshlp -----
between dose and risk and curve B shows how
a direct interpolation would lead to an Dose
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
1 much as 25% above the ICRP risk estimates
r r 15
bq
?I#$@
4
Effectsof
kin
ionising
radiation tomach
iyroi
Hd@dI&@ emaindc
d&aa
for the working population (those aged 18 to
65 years) is lower because it does not contain
children and young people who have more
years at risk after exposure: the total value
for workers is 4.0x 1 0-2
SV-' or 4% per Sv.
Values of the risk factors apply to typical
people in a population regardless of age or
gender: for an actual person, however, they
depend both on age and on gender. If a person
receives a dose late in life, a cancer may not
have time to appear before the person dies
of another cause; and the risk of breast cancer
is virtually zero for men and twice the listed
value, 0.4x 10-' Sv-' or 1 in 250,for women.
A crucial characteristic of the representative
international population is the prevailing risk
of fatal cancer from all causes because the
risk from radiation is related to it. Since cancer
mortality in the UK is generally somewhat
higher than worldwide, the risk factors are as
but with~nthe uncertainty.
Hereditary disease
Apart from cancer, the other maln late effect
of radaton 1s hered~taryd~seaseAs with
cancer, the probabiBty of heredtary dlsease
- but not ~ t s severity - depends on dose
Genetic damage arises from irradiation of the
testes and ovaries, which produce sperm cells
in males and the egg cells in females. lonising
radiation can induce mutations in these cells
or in the germ cells that form them, mutations
which may give rise to harmful effects in future
generations. Mutations occur as a result of
structural changes to the DNA in single germ
cells, which subsequently carry the hereditary
information in the DNA through future
generations. The hereditary diseases that
may be caused vary in severity ranging from
early death and serious mental defects to
relatively trivial skeletal abnormalities and
minor metabolic disorders.
Although mutations appear to arise in human
beings without any apparent cause, natural
radiation and other agents in the environment
may also cause them and contribute to the
prevailing occurrence of hereditary disease.
There has, however, been no conclusive
evidence in human offspring for hereditary
defects attributable to exposure from natural
or artificial radiation. Extensive studies of the
offspring of the survivors of the atomic bombs,
in particular, have failed to show increases of
statistical significance in hereditary defects;
instead, the negative findings help to provide
an upper estimate of the risk factor for them.
Large experimental studies have been made of
the hereditary damage that ionising radiation
induces in animals, mainly mice. These have
covered a wide range of doses and dose rates
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
and clearly demonstrate that ionising radiation
does cause mutations.The results also show
how often hereditary defects are induced by
known doses. When considered with the
findings for the atomic bomb survivors, this
information allows estimates to be made of
the hereditary risk for human beings.
Against this background, ICRP has assessed
the risk of severe hereditary disease in a
general population of all ages exposed to low
doses and dose rates. It estimated a risk
factor of 1 .Ox 10-2SV' or 1 in 100 per Sv
for such diseases appearing at any time in all
future generations. Mutations leading to
diseases that are strictly heritable, such as
haemophilia and Down's Syndrome, make up
about half of the total: the remainder comes
from a group of so-called multifactorial
diseases such as diabetes and asthma. This
estimate of risk carries considerable
uncertainty especially for the multifactorial
diseases where the interplay of the genetic
and environmental factors that influence the
disorders is poorly understood.
In genetic terms, irradiation of the testes and
ovaries is potentially harmful only if it occurs
before or during the reproductive period of life:
for o
. e o. ~ l ewho will not subsequently have
children there is, of course, no hereditary
risk. Since the proportion of a working
population that is likely to reproduce is lower
than that in the general population, the risk
factor for workers is smaller: ICRP estimates
0 . 6 1~0-2SV-I or 1 in 1 70 per Sv for severe
hereditary diseases in all future generations.
Communal risk
An important consequence of the assumption
that risk is proportional to dose, without a low
dose threshold, is that the collective effective
dose becomes an indicator of communal
harm. It makes no difference mathematically
whether, in a community of 50 000 people,
each receives an effective dose of 2 mSv, or in
a community of 20 000 people, each receives 4
5 mSv; the collective dose in each community
Effectsof
is 100 man Sv, and the communal cost in
each community may be five cancer deaths ionising
and one severe hereditary defect in future mdiation
generations. Members of the smaller
community, however, run the greater individual &tZxh&rn in
risk of fatal cancer. Calculations of collective
pmcsffeg
dose should not be taken too far: the product
of an infinitude of people and an infinitesimal
dose, with the calculation of expected numbers
of cancer deaths, is likely to be meaningless.
Other late effects
One category of late effects does not ~nvolve
an element of probablllty these effects will
appear In people ~fthey receive a large dose
over a long tlme, and the severlty will Increase
w ~ t hIncreasing dose Such effects are not
usually fatal but can be d~sabllngor dlstresslng
because the function of some parts of the
body may be lmpalred or other non-mal~gnant
changes may arlse The best known examples
are cataracts [opac~tyIn the I'ens of the eye)
and skln damage [thlnnlng and ulceration)
H~ghabsorbed doses of several gray are
normally required to ~nducethese condltion~
Irradiation in pregnancy
The risks to children irradiated while in the
womb deserve special mention. If an embryo
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
or fetus is exposed to rad~ationat the time
when organs are forming, developmental
defects such as a reduced diameter of the
head or mental retardat~onmay be caused
Studies on survivors of the atomic bombs
who were exposed before birth have indicated
that mental retardation mainly follows
exposure during the period between 8 and
15 weeks after conception. There has been
debate over the form of the relationship
between dose and response and the ex~stence
of a threshold below whlch there IS no effect
For exposures durlng the most sens~t~ve
, Effmtsof
8- 1 5 week per~od,however, ICRP assumes
that the decrease In IQ depends dlrectly on
the dose wlthout a threshold and w ~ t ha loss
radiation of 3 0 IQ polnts per Sv So, for example,
exposure of the fetus to 5 mSv dur~ngthls
stage of pregnancy would lead to a loss In IQ
! , q d i$aft
~ area to the early part of the menstrual cycle
of 0.15 polnt, whlch would be undetectable
H~ghdoses to the embryo and fetus can cause
death or gross malformation the threshold
for these effects 1s between 0 1 Sv and 1 Sv or
High dose e rate:
much of the body
- --?a of skin
;tes and ovaries
Any dose or dose rate
Risk depends on dose
Appear years later
Hereditary defects y dose or dose rate
, ,
'ose
more depending on the time after conception.
Genetic risks to fetuses are judged to be the
same as those for a fully reproductive
population after birth, namely 2.4 x 1 0-2 S v l
or 1 in 40 per Sv. Irradiation before birth can
also lead to an increased risk of malignancy in
childhood. The risk of fatal cancer up to age
15 years is estimated to be about 3.0 x 10-'Sv-'
or 1 in 30 per Sv, and the overall risk of cancer
about twice this value.
For all of these reasons it is best for pregnant
women to avoid diagnostic X-rays of the
abdomen unless a delay until the end of
pregnancy would be undesirable. Indeed for
all women of reproductive age where
pregnancy cannot be reasonably excluded,
it may be prudent to restrict diagnostic
procedures that give high doses in the pelvic
when pregnancy is least likely. Special
restrictions apply to the doses that pregnant
women may receive if they are employed in
work with radiation sources.
Human 3 from varlous sources
Risk factors for human I -
estimated from hlgh doses and
dose rates in h~
Risk factors
infe l fro
tho nnrc
nur
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
5 System of
radiological protection
General principles
Approaches to protectron against ronlslng
radiat~onare remarkably consistent
throughout the world Thls IS due largely to
the lnternat~onalCommlss~onon Radiological
Protection (ICRP), the non-governmental
sclentlfic organlsation that for seven decades
or so has published recommendatlons for
protection against lonlslng rad~atlons
Its authority derrves from the screntific standln,
of ~ t smembers and the merrt of ~ t s
recommendatlons Governments adopt the
recommendatlons and put them Into pract~ce
in a manner appropriate to the countries
concerned The European Comm~ssionunder-
takes a similar task for member states of the
European Un~onwlth the alm of produc~nga
harmonrsed approach to rad~ologrcal
protectlon marnly through binding directives
For all human act~onsor practrces that add to
rad~at~on exposure, ICRP recommends a system
of rad~ologlcalprotect~onbased on three central
requirements Each of these rnvolves soclal
cons~derat~ons - explicitly In the first two and
impllcltly In the thrrd - so there IS cons~derable
need for the exerclse of judgement
In some cases, as for example after an accident
that releases radioactive material to the
S
System of
t"adP0iOgi~~I
JUSTIFICATION
OF A PRA(
No practice involving exposures to rad
should be adopted unless it produces
at least sufficient benefit to the expos1 @nrn
individuals or to society to offset the wwi*
radiation detriment it causes
1 2 O ~ I M I ~ A T Ior
O NPRorEcrloli
ltion to any particular source
diation within a practice, all reasonable
eps should be taken to adjust the
,.otection so as to maximise the net bene
1 economic and social factors being taken
limit should 3pplied to the dose, oth?
=
than from medical exposures, received by
any individual as the result of all the
nrartir~s
tn ~nrhichh ~ nr she is pxnnsp
a
*
environment or when high indoor levels of
radon occur, ~tmay be necessary to rntervene
to reduce the exposure of people Under such
circumstances, ICRP recommends a system
of rad~ologlcalprotect~onfor rntervent~on
based on two further principles which malnly
differ from the first set In that they omit dose
limits: specifying limits might require measures
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

out of all proportion to the likely benefit and
would therefore be in conflict with the first
principle. The application of this system again
requires the exercise of judgement.
1The proposed intervention should (
nore good than harm, that is, the br
.esulting from the reduction in dose
--.
jhould be sufficient to justify the har
3nd the costs, including social costs,
:he intervention
-
* "
eJ?gaaal
m L
sensible: it might also limit the benefits.
However, the principles of justification and
optimisation, discussed next, should apply in
full, particularly as the collective dose from
medical procedures is high.
Justification of practices
, The first requirement In the system of radio-
logical protectlon for practices emphaslses
: the obvlous need to cons~derharmful costs
In the light of any benefits. In most cases,
i i;
$# ,
radiation effects are just some of a number of
possible harmful outcomes that make up

2 The form, scale, and duration of tl- - 7 Y ::
ntervention should be chosen so that th
l e t benefit of the reduction of dose, that
s, the benefit of the reduction in doc- '-
';
prataZiot9 the costs of the intervention, shol~ld
arge as reasonably achievable
Iff*..
Justification
NRPB has endorsed both systems of radio-
of pructtces
logical protectlon for use In the UK. In thls
chapter, we shall concentrate malnly on the
system of protection for practices In later
chapters, we shall drscuss circumstances In
which lnterventlon may be necessary
Scope of application
We can generally do nothing sensible to
reduce the normal levels of dose from natural
radiation, although it is appropriate to
intervene when people are exposed to high
levels of radon in their homes. For workers,
however, some control needs to be exercised
over exposures to sources of natural radiation.
Three sources are particularly important:
radon in mines and other places, cosmic rays
on-board aircraft, and ores with elevated levels
of natural activity.
The use of rad~ationIn medlclne 1s malnly a
matter of clin~calludgement slnce medlcal
exposures are ~ntendedto benefit patients
Setting llmlts on doses to patlents would not be
part of the overall soc~aland economlc costs.
If there are other ways to ach~evethe same
end, wlth or wlthout rad~at~on, it IS lrnportant
to analyse the costs and benefits of the
alternatives before maklng a final dec~slon
The Issues that arlse In the process of justlfica-
tlon extend beyond radiolog~calprotection and
may be ~llustratedby the arguments about
the nuclearpower programme The rad~olog~cal
consequences of the programme Include
the dlscharge of radloactlve substances to
the environment and the doses recelved by
workers In the nuclear power lndustry
In addition, a full analysis would deal with the
potential for nuclear reactor accidents as well
as the creation of highly radioactive wastes.
Account should also be taken of doses and
accidents to overseas uranium miners.
An assessment should then be made of the
consequences of doing without the energy
provided by nuclear power or of using
alternative methods to produce it - with coal
for instance. Generating electric power from
coal creates large volumes of waste and
releases gases that worsen the greenhouse
effect Coal-fired power stations also dlscharge
other noxlous substances lncludlng natural
radloactlvlty, mlners suffer occupational
dlsease, and there 1s the potentlal for mlnlng
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
accidents. A complete analysis would also
need to consider several strategic and
economic factors: the diversity, security,
availability, and reserves of various fuels; the
construction and operating costs of various
types of power station; the expected
demand for electricity; the willingness of
people to work in a particular industry.
Proper justlficat~onIS also requlred for the
use of X-rays In d~agnostlcmedlclne Few of
us would quest~onthe practlce the benefits
are undoubted even though lndlvldual doses
for some examlnat~ons,and collective doses
generally, are hlgh Nevertheless each
procedure needs to be judged on ~ t sown
merlts a mass X-ray screenlng programme
for cancer that m ~ g hcause
t more cancers
than ~twas llkely to reveal would clearly be
unacceptable For thls reason, there IS
unl~kelyto be cllnlcal justlficatlon for the
routlne screenlng of employees except In
spec~alcircumstances such as the prevention
of tuberculos~sMed~callrrad~at~on durlng
pregnancy requlres clear justlficat~onand
careful techn~quesRadiolog~calexamlnatlons
for legal or Insurance purposes are usually
unwarranted slnce they do not benefit the
health of the exposed person
Pract~cesare proposed from time to t ~ m e
that fall to satisfy the test of just~ficat~on
these lnclude the product~onof toys and
jewellery contalnlng rad~oactlvematerlal and
other dev~cessuch as securlty tags for whlch
there are non-rad~oact~ve alternatives
Qptimisation of protection
Since we must assume that no radiation
dose is entirely free from risk, it is not enough
merely to comply with a dose limit: it is
Important to pay attent~onto doses below
the l ~ mand
~ t to reduce them whenever lt is
reasonably achievable. Of course eventually
-
the point must come when further reductions
in dose become unreasonable in the sense
that the social and economic costs would
outweigh the value of the reductions.
As for the second requirement - the
optlmlsat~onof protectlon -we need to note
here that ICRP has seen fit to place a
constraint on the procedure Th~stakes the
form of restrlctlons on doses or rlsks
to people so as to prevent lnequltable
exposures from rad~atron
O p t l m ~ s a t ~ oofn protectlon has been
lncreaslngly rnfluent~aldurlng the past two
5
decades wlth the result that the annual dose astern of
to radlat~onworkers In the UK has fallen to mdiological
1 5 mSv, on average, an order of magn~tude protection
below the dose l ~ m lfor t a slngle year of
2 0 mSv that NRPB has recommended Some
groups of workers recelve doses a few tlmes
the average, and some workers recelve more
than 2 0 mSv In a year, but the number dolng
so IS a very small percentage of the total
Exposure to natural sources of r a d ~ a t ~ o n
In the workplace affects the national average
apprec~ablyoccupat~onalexposure to
art~ficlalsources alone leads to an average
annual dose of 0 3 mSv
The lndlvldual members
the public practices that cause
t 1 mSv
have been brought below the l ~ m lof
In a slnggl year NRPB
The groups people are
exposed to rad~oactlvedischarges from
nuclear facilities typically receive 0.14 mSv in
a year, but a few individuals mav receive as
much as 0.5 mSv in a year by direct irradiation
near some nuclear power stations,
There are a number of reasons for these
ach~evementsSlnce managements must keep
doses from practices below certain limits,
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
average doses w ~ ltend
l to be lower stlll
Moreover, dose constralnts are lncreas~ngly
b e ~ n gused based on experience gamed
from well-managed operat~ons,these may be
set apprec~ablybelow the dose l ~ m l t
Pract~cesthat cause exposure of the publlc
are controlled through caut~ousest~matesof
the dose to the most h~ghlyexposed group
of lndlv~dualsand the appl~cat~on of an
appropr~ateconstraint All such procedures
are ~ u d ~ c ~ ways
o u s of fulfill~ngthe
requlrement to keep all doses as low as
reasonably ach~evable
5
Limitation of doses
System of
The thlrd requlrement for practices expresses 1 mSv once pregnancy has been declared
mdioIog~aI the obl~gat~on not to expose ~ndlv~dual people
protection and t h e ~ descendants
r to an unacceptable
degree of r~skThls IS fulfilled by Imposlng strlct
Constraints dose l~mltsand adoptlng constralnts At the
tlme of wr~tlng,the statutory I l m ~for
t workers
IS st11150 mSv In a year, but follow~ngthe
latest ICRP recommendations, NRPB advlses
that ~tshould be reduced to 20 mSv In a year
For a member of the publlc, the statutory
l ~ mIS~ 5t mSv In a year NRPB adv~sesthat
thls should be reduced to 1 mSv ~na year
These prlme l ~ m ~ texpressed
s, In terms of
effectlve dose, are Intended to control the
lnc~denceof serlous effects such as cancer
and hered~taryharm that lnvolve an element
of probablllty Another set of I~mlts,
expressed In terms of equivalent dose, IS to
protect the eyes, skln and extremltles aga~nst
other forms of damage Both sets are
v~rtually~dent~cal wlth those of ICRP, as 1s the
recommendat~onthat the dose to the fetus
of a pregnant worker should not exceed
There are two common mlsconceptlons
about dose l~rnltsThe first 1s that they mark
an abrupt change In b~olog~cal risk, a l ~ n eof
demarcat~onbetween safe and unsafe
It should be clear from the dlscuss~onon dose
and r~skthat t h ~ sIS not so. ~tshould also be
apparent from the fact that there are d~fferent
dose l ~ m ~for
t s workers and members of the
publ~cThese l~mltsd~fferbecause h~gher
r~sksare deemed more acceptable for workers,
who recelve a benefit from the~remployment,
than for members of the public, whose r ~ s kIS
~nvoluntaryThe second m~sconcept~on
IS that keeplng doses below the l~rnltsIS the
only Important requirement In rad~olog~cal
protectlon on the contrary, the o v e r r ~ d ~ n g
requlrement IS to keep doses as low as
reasonably ach~evableThere IS an lncreaslng
emphas~son dose constralnts, whlch are, of
course, set below dose l ~ m ~ t s
Constraints
Constra~ntsare best Imposed on a practice
involving exposure to radiation at the plann~ng
stage. For workers, the annual value of dose
should be chosen so as to reflect what can
reasonably be reached In a particular industry
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

or procedure; it may well be a small fraction Attttudes

and control
of the dose limit. NRPB recommends a
of risk
maximum value of 15mSv in a year, which
is also to be regarded as an investigation
level for doses already incurred from
existing practices. For members of the public,
the NRPB constraint, 0.3mSv in a year,
is a planning value for a new source of
radiation exposure such as a factory that
intends to discharge radioactive material
to the environment

A form of dose constraint is also appropriate

for medical exposures of patients. In this 5
circumstance, however, the parameter is called
System of
a reference dose even though the object is still The annual risk of fatal cancer associated
to minimise doses in a sensible way. We shall with the annual average dose of 1.5mSv for radiol~cal
return to this topic in Chapter 7. workers is 6.0x 1 0-5 or 1 in 1 7 000;it is pmtedion
apprec~ablyhlgher than the general level of
Comparing risks fatal acc~dentsIn the manufacturing and
One way of judging the effectiveness of the Compuring
sewlce sectors and comparable to the rlsk In
system of radlologlcal protection IS to compare risks
the constructlon Industry Although such
the resldual risks of fatal cancer from rad~at~on
compansons are Inherently cautlous because
wlth the prevalllng r~sksof death from other
the nature and tlme of death are so different,
causes Two circumstances are relevant - rlsks
there can be no dlspute about the end effect,
at work and rlsks otherwise
lt must be noted that radlatlon workers
To facilitate comparison, it is helpful to consider also run the risk of death from conventional
what levels of risk might be appropriate in an causes. Comparative data show why
advanced country such as the UK. The simple continuous exposure at 20mSv in a year
diagram shows how risk alters from being low would be undesirable: the implied risk of fatal
and acceptable through a tier of tolerability into cancer is 8.0 x 1 0-4or 1 in 1250.
a high region of unacceptability. Assessment:
by the Royal Society and other organisations
indicate that a fatal risk of 1 0-3 or 1 in 1000
in a year is about the limit of tolerability for
workers: for members of the general public,
however, a fatal risk around 1 0-5 or 1 in
- hd b:
bg* f t 1 . 1
C?nftry$~t
I00000 in a year is judged to be near the ;R;&a&h
I . I
;
* 7 7
limit. An important reason for the difference lMe&lmn
is that workers are exposed voluntarily to ,+,ahl
the radaton rlsk, whereas members of the r 1 q-1

general publlc are l~kelyto have lt Imposed 'chanDa

' " p*r;d; *
on them .*All f ' i c
v " ? v
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

on the Health and Safety Executive (HSE).

Several government departments and the
agencies they sponsor also have important
roles: the Department of Health has a

through its sponsorship of NRPB.

Linlxs with
o&er

The annual risk of fatal cancer associated

systemof wlth the average annual dose of 2 6 mSv to
the publlc In the UK from all sources of
mdiological
radlatlon IS about 1 3 x 1 0-4 or 1 ~n7700
protection Most of thls is attr~butableto natural sources As a member of the European Un~on,the UK
about whlch we can do llttle Some members 1s obl~gedto Implement various d~rectlveson
Le?giIPlafftr&ls of the publlc are part~cularlyconcerned about radlolog~calprotection formulated by
the rlsks from nuclear discharges as the data the European Commlsslon and made by the
show, however, the annual rlsk to the most Council of Mlnlsters As Indicated previously,
exposed group 1s about 7 0 x 1 0-6 or 1 In such directives are closely derlved from the
1 40 000 - much the same as the rlsk of death recommendat~onsof ICRP and are compatible
durlng pregnancy Slnce the rlsk of fatal cancer wlth systems of control In most advanced
assoc~atedwlth the dose llmlt of 1 mSv ~na countries throughout the world Developments
year is about 5 0 x 1 0-5 or 1 ~n2 0 000, lt IS durlng the past four decades have been ln the
clear why constraints are required. direct~onof more stringent controls as more
informatron on rlsks has become available
Legal controls
The system of radlolog~calprotection NRPB contributes to the development of the
described here is implemented by statute in ICRP recommendations and the consultations
the UK. A substantial body of legislation has on the European Commission directives and
b u ~ lup
t since the 1940s and IS supported by then advises on their applicability in the UK.
codes of good practlce and advisory material;
there 1s also a comprehensive scheme of
licences, authorisations, and approvals
Virtually every c~rcumstanceis covered from
the design of nuclear power stations through
the control of radon In off~cesto the use of
X-ray sets in veterinary surgeries.

Responsibility for enforcing radiological

protection in workplaces in the UK falls mainly
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

6 Natural
ionising radiation
Air flight
and cosmic 6
mdiation Natural ionising radiation pervades the whole
environment. Cosmic rays rea'ch the earth Natural.
from outer space, the earth itself is radioactive, ionising
-10 pSv per hour and natural activity is present in food and radiation
drink and in the air. We are all exposed to
natural radiation to a greater or lesser
extent, and for most people it is the major
source of radiation exposure. Nevertheless,
animals and plants have evolved in this
background of natural radiation, and the
general view is that it is not a significant risk
to health - but there are exceptions.
- 5 pSv per hour
Cosmic radiation
Cosmic rays are mainly protons of uncertain
origin in space and very high energies which
reach our atmosphere in fairly constant
numbers. It is known, however, that some
Himalayas 6.7 km - -1pSv per hour protons with lower energies come from the
sun and are given off in bursts during solar
flares. Protons are charged particles, so the
5 km
number entering the atmosphere is affected
by the earth's magnetic field: more come in
Ulasa, Tibet 3.7 km near the poles than the equator. As they
penetrate the atmosphere, the cosmic rays
Mexico City 2.25 km
initiate complex reactions and are gradually
2 km - 0 . 1 pSv per hour absorbed so that the dose decreases as
Denver 1.6 km ~

altitude decreases. In the UK, the annual

effective dose equivalent from cosmic rays at
0.03 USV per hour ground level is about 0.25 mSv, on average.
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

Most people in the UK live at low altitudes,
so there is little variation in annual dose on
this account; nor is there much variation with
latitude. The type of building in which a
person lives may affect the dose to a slight
degree. The intensity of cosmic rays at
altitudes where aircraft fly is much greater
than on the ground. General air travel gives
rise to a further annual dose of 0.01 mSv, on
average, bringing the total to 0.26mSv.
Gamma radiation
All materials in the earth's crust contain
radioactive species: indeed energy from
6 mater~alswrth unusually h~ghactlvlty
natural activity deep in the earth contributes
Natuml to the shaping of the crust. This energy comes
extracted from the earth, they too are mrldly
rad~oact~ve, and people are lrrad~ated
Indoors as well as out of doors The doses
they recelve are affected both by the
geology of the area where they llve and the
structure of the bulldlngs In wh~chthey I~ve,
but the average effect~vedose In the UK from
natural gamma rays 1s about 0 35 mSv In a
year Actual values vary appreciably some
people may recelve doses a few tlmes h~gher
or lower than the average Although there 1s
l~ttlethat can be done to affect thls dose, lt
would be sens~bleto avold bu~ldlngsltes and
I

ionising mainly from uranium, thorium, and potassium.

radiation
Uranium is dispersed throughout rocks and
soils in low concentrations of a few parts
per million (ppm);where it exceeds 1000 ppm
or so in an ore, it may be economical to mine
for use in nuclear reactors. As we have seen,
uranium-238 is the parent of a long series
of radionuclides of several elements, which
decay in succession until the stable nuclide
Radon inhalation
lead-206 is reached. Among the decay
Radon gas IS a part~cularlyslgnlficant source
products in the series is an isotope of the
of exposure to natural radlatron Thls IS because
radioactive gas radon, namely radon-222,
the ~mmed~ate decay products of radon-222
which can reach the atmosphere, where it
are rad~onucl~des wlth short half-l~veswh~ch
continues to decay. Thorium is similarly
attach themselves to fine part~clesIn the alr,
dispersed in the earth, and thorium-232 is
are Inhaled, lrrad~atethe tlssues of the lung
the parent of another radioactive series,
w~thalpha part~cles,and Increase the r~skof
which gives rise to radon-220, another
lung cancer The same IS true of radon-220,
isotope of radon, sometimes called thoron.
but the degree of exposure of the lung 1s much
Potassium is far more common than either
less When radon gas enters the atmosphere
uranium or thorium and makes up 2.4% by
from the ground, ~td~spersesIn the alr, so
weight of the earth's crust. The radionuclide
concentratrons out of doors are low When the
potassium-40, however, constitutes only
gas enters a bu~ldlng,predom~nantlythrough
120 ppm of stable potassium.
the floor from the ground, the concentrat~on
The radionuclides in the earth emit of activity builds up within the enclosed space:
penetrating gamma rays that irradiate us more for the UK, it is typically about 20 Bq m-3
or less uniformly. Since building materials are (becquerel per cubic metre of air).
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
The annual effective dose in the UK from the
decay products of radon is estimated to
be 1.3 mSv, on average. There are, however,
pronounced variations about this value: in
some homes, the occupants have received
doses two orders of magnitude higher. Areas
affected by radon to a marked degree have
been identified throughout the UK.
If the radon level exceeds 200 Bq m-', ten
times the average, homeowners are advised
to reduce it so as to reduce the risk of lung
cancer; this concentration is known as the
Action Level. Anyone finding such a high
radon level can reduce it by preventing air
from the ground entering the building. The
most effective way to do so is to reduce the
air pressure under the house with a small fan.
In the most affected areas, the building
regulations have been changed to ensure that
new homes do not have high radon levels.
As mentioned in Chapter 5, this circum-
stance is an example of intervention, in the
ICRP sense, to reduce human exposure to
ionising radiation.
Internal irradiation
Other radionuclides from the uranium and
thorium series, in particular lead-210 and
polonium-210, are present in air, food, and
water, and so irradiate the body internally.
Potassium-40 also comes into the body with
the normal diet; it is the main source
of internal irradiation apart from the radon
6
decay products. In addition, the interactions
of cosmic rays with the atmosphere create a Natural
number of radionuclides, such as carbon-1 4, ionising
which also contribute to internal irradiation.
radiation
The average effective dose from these sources
of internal irradiation is estimated to be JIpf&wt'
0.3 mSv in a year for the UK with potassium-40
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

contr~butlngabout half lnformatlon on how

the total varles from one person to another IS
Iim~ted,although ~t1s known that the potassium
content of the human body IS controlled by
blologlcal processes the amount of potassium
and hence potasslum-40,varles wlth the
amount of muscle in the body, and IS about
twlce as hlgh In young men as In older
women There IS llttle anyone could do
to affect Internal lrradiatlon from the other
radlonuclides except by avoidlng any food
and water with a hlgh radioactive content

Total doses
The total average effective dose from natural
radlat~onis about 2 2 mSv In a year for the
UK D~fferencesIn average doses from one
locallty to another readlly exceed 10 mSv In
a year, and differences in individual doses may
exceed 100 mSv In a year because of homes
with particularly hlgh levels of radon and ~ t s
decay products The collective effectlve dose
is about 1 30 000 man Sv In a year

Collective and lndlvldual doses are useful

measures for comparing the slgnlficance for
health of natural and artificial rad~ations,
but they may need to be supplemented
by addltlonal data when there are, as wlth
Indoor radon, large varlatlons about the
average The most helpful step might be to
descr~bethe frequency with which doses of a
certaln magnitude occur In the circumstances
of Interest
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

7 Medical uses of
ionising radiation
lonlslng radlat~onhas two very dlfferent uses
In medlclne - for d~agnos~s and therapy
Both are lntended to benefit patients and, as
wlth any use of radlatlon, the benefit must
outwelgh the risk We have touched on this
matter of just~ficat~on~nChapter 5
Most people at some tlme In thelr l~veshave
an X-ray examlnatlon to help the ~hyslclan
d~agnosedlsease or damage In the body
A much less diagnostic procedure
lnvolves the admlnlstratlon of radlonucl~des
pat'ents as to Observe how Organs are
funct~onlngPhysclans use ether of these
procedures ~fthey cannot make a d~agnos~s
without them Radlatlon doses are generally
low although they can be apprec~ableIn
certaln procedures
1I
, the ~nternalstructures of the
E
L
: are captured and processed
1 Images explalns why docto
-
7
Much hlgher doses are required to treat
Medical
malignant dlseases or malfunction~ngorgans
sometimes ~ncomb~nat~on wlth other forms of uses of
treatment A beam of rad~atlonmay be used ionising
to lrradlate the affected part of the body or radiation
a fa~rlyhlgh actrvlty of a radlonucllde may be
admln~steredto the patlent
The use of X-rays for examlnlng patients
IS called diagnostic rad~ologyand the use of
rad~onuclldesfor diagnosis or therapy
,uc,earmedlclne When radlatlon beams are
used to treat patients, the procedure 1s
called radloiherapy
DiaaOStiC radiology
In a convent~onalX-ray examlnatlon, rad~at~on
from a machlne passes through t
X-rays penetrate flesh and bone
to dlfferent degrees and produc
lmages on photographic film of
body In some cases, the ]mag
electron~callyThe value of
dentlsts conduct as many as
35 m ~ l l ~ X-ray
o n examinations
each year In the UK
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
The parts of the body most frequently
examined are the chest, limbs, and teeth, each
accounting for about 25% of the total number
of examinations. Doses are fairly low -
about 0.02mSv from a chest examination, for
example. Effective doses from other types of
examination, such as the lower spine, are
higher because organs and tissues that are
more sensitive to radiation are exposed to
a greater degree. Examinations of the lower
bowel uslng a bar~umenema result ~na
substantla1 dose around 7 mSv, only 1% or
so of all exam~natlonsare of thls type.
7
Medjcui
uses of
ionising
mdiatjon
Nuclear
medicine
Computed tomography (CT) has increased
considerably in recent years to the point
where approximately 4% of all procedures in
diagnostic radiology are CT scans. With this
technique, a fan-shaped beam of X-rays is
rotated around the patient and registered
on the opposite side by a row of detectors.
An image of a slice or section through the
patient is then reconstructed by a computer
and conveys superior diagnostic information.
However, doses in CT can be an order of
magnitude higher than those from conventional
X-ray examinations.
1
Diagnostic radiology as a whole makes a
contribution of about 20000man Sv to the
annual collective dose from ionising radiation
in the UK. Of this, CT contributes about 40%,
examinations of the lower bowel about lo%,
and chest examinations about 1%. It is clear
from these figures that some relatively
infrequent procedures give a far greater dose
to the population than the more common
examinations. Further, they explain why it is
important that a CT scan should not be used
if an ordinary X-ray examination would suffice
for a sound diagnosis.
Nuclear medicine
For a diagnostic procedure in nuclear medicine,
the patient is given a radionuclide in a
carrying substance, such as a pharmaceutical,
which is preferentially taken up by the
tissue or organ under study; administration
may be by injection, ingestion or inhalation.
The radionuclide emits gamma rays.
Most of the diagnostic procedures make use
of the radionuclide technetium-99m: it has a
half-life of 6 hours, gives off gamma rays with
an energy of 0.14 MeV, can be conveniently
prepared in the hospital,-andreadily labels a
variety of carrying substances. A special
detector called a gamma camera is used to
observe how the organs or tissue behave or
how quickly the radionuclide moves.
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

-
Individual doses from technetium scans are Radiotherapy
comparable to those in diagnostic radiology. This technique is used to cure cancers or at
The collective dose from nuclear medicine is, least to alleviate the most distressing
however, an order of magnitude less. symptoms. A beam of high energy X-rays,
Technetium gamma rays or electrons is directed towards
generator
the diseased tissue so as to give it a high
dose while sparing the surrounding healthy
tissue. If a tumour is deep in the body, the
beam is pointed at it from several directions
so as to reduce the incidental damage.
Another form of treatment, in which a radiation
source is placed in or on the body for a short
period, is used for particular forms of cancer:
it is called brachytherapy. 7
Medical
Tumours require absorbed doses of tens of
uses of
gray to kill the cancer cells effectively.
Considerable care is required to deliver ionising
I
accurate doses: too low or too high doses mdiation
may lead to incomplete treatment or
3 unacceptable s~de-effects.As radiotherapy Reference
joses are strong, such treatment IS only
doses
used when the outlook for a cure or rel~ef1s
good and when other methods of treatment
would be less effect~ve

When radionuclides are used for treatment Although radiotherapy can cure the original
rather than diagnosis, much greater activities cancer, it may possibly cause cancer
are given to the patient and much higher in other tissues or adverse genetic effects in
doses are given to the target tissues or organs. subsequent children. Most pedp~ewho
The treatment of an overactive thyroid gland receive radiotherapy are, however, past the
- hyperthyroidism - is probably the most age to have children and too old for delayed
common therapeutic procedure, the radio- cancers to occur. So the aim of radiotherapy
nuclide being iodine- 1 31. This illustrates a is to maximise the effectiveness of treatment
paradox in radiological protection: the while minimising the adverse side-effects.
beneficial use of a radioactive substance
Reference doses
which in other circumstances becomes an
Since diagnostic radiology is so widely used
environmental contaminant.
and the collective dose so large, it is important
Fam~lyand fr~endsof a patlent to whom a to avo~dunnecessary exposures and keep
radlonucllde has been glven may sometimes the essent~alexposures as low as poss~ble
be adv~sedby the hospltal to take appropr~ate The decision whether to prescribe an X-ray
precautions agalnst Inadvertent exposure to examination IS a matter of med~caljudgement
themselves from the res~dualactlvlty
-
made ~nthe best ~nterestsof the patlent
~u
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

When dec~dedupon, the dose to the patlent

should be the lowest poss~blecompat~ble
wlth accurate d~agnos~s Physlc~anstake
particular care to mrnlmlse doses In
paed~atrlcexamlnatlons
Methods of mlnlmlslng doses Include the use
of good equ~pmentthat 1s well malntalned,
properly adjusted and skllfully operated, and
havlng a programme of quallty assurance In
the X-ray department Doses from the same
X-ray examlnatlon may vary from patlent to
patlent because of differences In size and
shape, but they should generally fall below
an agreed value Th~s,as we ment~onedIn
Chapter 5,1scalled a reference dose A set of
uses of reference doses for the more common X-ray
ionishg examlnatlons has been recommended In the
mdiutian UK Adherence to them 1s causlng a downward
trend In doses throughout the country

mf., Total doses

If we conslder dlagnost~cprocedures In
rad~ologyand nuclear medlclne, the collective
dose ~nthe UK IS about 22 000 man Sv rn a
year, whlch ~ m p l ~ e0s37mSv each when
averaged across the entlre populat~onThe
realty IS, however, that young people do not
have many X-rays and that the Ilkellhood of
need~ngan examlnatlon Increases w ~ t hage,
thls ~ m p l ~ ea slower probablllty, In general, of
any consequential cancers belng expressed
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
8 Occupational
exposure to
ionising radiation
Exposure to ionising radiation occurs in many
occupations, most obviously to those who
work in the nuclear power industry. Artificial
sources of radiation are also commonly used
in the manufacturing and service industries,
in areas of defence, in research institutions,
and in universities. Moreover, we have seen
in Chapter 7 that they are extensively used
by health professionals.
I
Occupationd
Some workers are also exposed to natural
exposure to
sources of rad~at~on In such circumstances that
a measure of supervlslon and protection 1s ionising
requlred Thls IS particularly true of exposure radiation
to radon In mlnes and In ordlnary premlses
throughout the areas of the country worst
affected by radon It 1s also true of alrcrew
who are exposed to elevated levels of cosmlc
rays at flylng altitudes
Many people who work with radiation wear
personal monitoring devices such as a small
photographic film or some thermo-
luminescent (TL] material in a special holder.
These register the radiation incident on the
body from external sources and yield an
estimate of the dose. NRPB issues about half
a million such devices each year as a
monitoring service.
For airborne activity in the workplace,
whether of artificial or natural origin, it is.
usually best to sample the air that the worker
breathes, measure it, and then estimate the
internal dose. In some cases, it may be
possible to measure activity in excreta and
infer the dose or indeed measure the activity
in the body directly with sensitive detectors.
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

NRpB Artificial sources

dosemeters
l Occupational exposure to art~ficlalsources of
radlat~onoccurs predominantly In the nuclear
and general lndustrles and the health
professions Doses have declined steeply In
the last decade or so for reasons that we have
I expla~nedIn Chapter 5, thls remark applles
to average as well as lnd~vldualdoses.

The objective always is to get the best possible

estimate of dose for comparison with limits.

All told, about a quarter of a million people
are occupationally exposed to ionising
radiat~onin the UK, but the collective dose is
about 380 man Sv in a year. More workers
are exposed to artificial than natural sources;
individual doses from the latter are, however,
an order of magnitude greater. The average
dose overall in occupational exposure is
around 1.5 mSv in a year.
I Doses in the health professions - medical,
Average doses from all types of occupational
exposure, including the nuclear industry,
are now below 1 mSv in a year. Some tens of
workers may receive more than 15 mSv in a
year, particularly industrial radiographers;
few if any receive more than 20 mSv in a year
except under unsatisfactory conditions that
may attract warning or prosecution by the
regulatory authorities.
dental and veterinary - are generally very low,
but there are still matters of concern. Some
clinical procedures with diagnostic radiology
require the physician to be close to the
patient and at risk of appreciable exposure.
X-ray equipment and procedures in veterinary
practices are sometimes inadequate.
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
Medicai
radiography
Natural sources
Occupat~onalexposure to natural sources
of rad~at~onoccurs ma~nly~ncoal mlnes,
bulld~ngs,and a~rplanesRelat~velyfew people
work ~nmlnes other than coal and ~nthe
processing of ores with levels of natural
activity appreciably above average: the doses
incurred are nevertheless monitored routinely.
Days of the week
Radon levels - and doses - are low in coal
mines because the ventilation is usually good:
few if any miners exceed 15 mSv in a year.
The state of ventilation in metal and other
mines is not always as satisfactory, so the
average dose is much higher and a fraction of
the workforce does exceed this dose.
About half of the people occupationally
exposed to natural radiation work in shops,
offices, schools and other premises in radon-
prone areas of the country. Within these
well-defined areas, the average dose is ,.
apprec~ableF~veper cent or so of the workers
8
recelve more than 15 mSv n a year and a
OCCUPQtiono,
smaller percentage 20 mSv or more Radon
~OSUsf ea
levels vary markedly from day to day
because of the way bu~ldlngsare heated and ionisin9
vent~lated,so short measurements of radon rudiation
in air may be misleading. The best remedy
for high radon levels is the same as in houses Natural
- reduced air pressure under the floor.
some$
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

Typical
doses on
air fljghts NR14 Paris 1 0.004
from London
RP15 Madrid 2 0.01 0
NR23 Rome 3 0.014
RP18 Kiev 4 0.01 8
PB71 New York 7 0.042
PB77 Los Angeles 13 0.069
PB93 Tokyo 14 0.078

Doses to aircrews from cosmic rays depend

on the routes flown and the time airborne.
On average, the annual dose is around
2 mSv, but it could be twice as much for long
flights continually at high altitudes. By the
nature of the radiation and the operations,
such doses are unavoidable. A pregnant
member of an aircrew will have a schedule of
work to avoid a dose above 1 mSv to the
unborn child.

Tatal doses
As lnd~catedhere, the collect~veeffectlve
dose from occupat~onalexposure to lonlslng
rad~atlonIS about 380 man Sv In a year In
the UK Spread over the entlre populat~on,
thls ~ m p l ~ eans annual dose approaching
0 007 mSv, a relatively mlnor contrlbutlon
to the overall value of 2 6mSv
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

9 Environmental
pollution
We have seen in Chapter 6 that natural
radionuclides pervade our environment. This
chapter is about the artificial radionuclides
that have been widely dispersed by events
such as tests of nuclear weapons in the
atmosphere and the Chernobyl accident and
by the deliberate discharge of radioactive
wastes from nuclear and other installations.
Such radionuclides find their way from air
and water on to the ground and into foodstuffs
and so deliver radiation doses in various
ways to human beings.
9
quant~t~es are Ingested w ~ t hfood and d r ~ n k
Res~dualact~v~ty In the ground
- of rad~onucl~desEiw&Wrndrni
that emlt gamma rays also causes a sl~ght
degree of human exposure Internal and
external ~ r r a d ~ a t ~contr~bute
on about equally
to the average effect~vedose of 0 0 0 4 mSv In
a year In the UK t h ~ scompares w ~ t ha peak
of 0 014 mSv In 1963 The collect~vedose IS
now about 2 4 0 man Sv In a year,

Weapons tests
When nuclear weapons are tested above
ground, they inject a variety of radionuclides
from hydrogen-3 (tritium) to plutonium-241
In the alr
into the upper atmosphere. From there, they
transfer slowly to the lower atmosphere and
then to earth. Around 500 atmospheric
explosions were conducted before the limited
test ban treaty in 1963 with a few more until
1980. By now, however, the concentrations
of radionuclides in air, rain and human diet
are much lower than the peak values in the
early 1960s.

Currently the most important radionuclides

in terms of human exposure are carbon-1 4,
strontium-90 and caesium-137: minute Pathwoys of exposure in the env~ronment
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

For the wetter upland reglons of the UK,

Chernobyl accident
An explos~onIn a nuclear reactor at the
s Chernobyl nuclear power plant on 26 Apr~l facll~t~es
1986 caused the release of substantla1
Environmental
quant~t~esof radlonucl~desdur~nga perlod of as do the regulatory agencles
pollution ten days A~rbornemater~alwas d~spersed
throughout Europe from the slte In the Ukra~ne
Radioactive and reached the UK wlth~na week As the
discharges contammated alr spread over the UK, local
weather cond~tronslargely determ~nedwhere
the rad~onucl~deswere to fall: heavy raln In the
northwest caused more to be depos~tedthere
In terms of dose to people, the most significant
however, the greater depos~t~onof act~v~ty
from
weapons testlng and the Chernobyl acc~dent
causes annual doses of about 0 012 mSv
Radioactive discharges
Art~fic~alrad~onucl~des are d~schargedto the
environment by the nuclear power ~ndustry,
defence establ~shments,research organlsa-
t~ons,hosp~talsand general Industry
D~scharges
- of any. slgn~ficance
- are subject to
statutory control: they must be authorised
and monitored. Owners or operators of the
from whlch rad~onucl~des are
dlscharged carry out mon~torlngprogrammes
The nuclear power ~ndustryd~schargesby far
the most act~vltyAt each stage of the nuclear
fuel cycle, a varlety of rad~onucl~des are
released In the form of liquids, gases or sol~d
part~clesThe nature of the effluent depends
on the particular operation or process
SV*
Uranlum plant fud
,. .%"

rad~onucl~des were ~od~ne-131, caes~um-134

ah
and caeslum- 137 Almost all of the dose Enrichment plant

was caused by external ~rrad~at~on from

rad~onuclldeson the ground and by Internal brlcatlon
lrrad~at~on from rad~onuclidesIn foodstuffs
l
In the first year after the acc~dent,the average Recycllng
or storage Ri rs
dose from Chernobyl contaminants was about
0 02 mSv It has now decllned to 0 001 mSv In
a% Reprocess~rrg
a year for the country as a whole, ~mplyinga
collective dose approaching60 man Sv annually.
I

Durlng fuel preparat~on,when the uranlum 1s

enrlched and the fuel elements are fabricated,
d~schargesma~nlyconta~nuranlum and
thor~umw ~ t hthe assoc~ateddecay products
. .*.
. . I . .
.. , ..
.. .. . .... .. . . .. - these be~ngnatural of course Annual doses
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
to the most exposed group of people near
the faclhtles are about 0 14mSv, most of which
1s due to d~schargeselsewhere In the fuel cycle
The collect~vedose to the whole population
of the UK IS less than 0 1 man Sv annually
In reactor operat~on,a~rborned~schargesto the
atmosphere glve rlse to an annual collectlve
dose of 5 man Sv or so, prlnc~pallyfrom
hydrogen-3, carbon-14 and sulphur-35 wlth
the annual dose to those most exposed belng
0 082 mSv The collectlve dose from l ~ q u ~ d
d~schargesto coastal waters, arlslng from the
consumptlon of rad~onuclidesIn seafoods, IS
much smaller, but lndlv~dualdoses locally are
dominated by dlscharges from fuel reprocesslng
Some older nuclear reactors cause d~rect
lrradlatlon of people near the power statlon
annual doses of 0 5 mSv have been est~mated
for them
D~schargesof rad~onucl~des to the lr~shSea
from the fuel reprocesslng faclllt~esat Sellafield
In Cumbr~ahave been greatly reduced In the
past decade or so The annual dose to the
most exposed people - those who eat local
seafood - IS some 0 14 mSv, malnly from
actlnldes In shellfish D~schargesto alr of
stront~um-90and other rad~onuclldeslead to
lnd~v~dual doses that are less than
0 055 mSv annually from the consumptlon
of local mllk and vegetables. The collectlve
dose from alrborne d~scharges,malnly due to
carbon-14 In foodstuffs, IS approx~mately
1 man Sv annually From llquld d~scharges,~t
1s about 4 man Sv annually, ma~nlydue to
caeslum- I37 In fish
Total doses
None of the other faclllt~esthat d~scharge
artlficlal radlonuclldes to the environment
causes doses much above 0 02 mSv In a year
to the most exposed people, nor do they
make a slgnlficant contr~butionto collectlve
dose. In round terms, therefore, the maximum
"
effectlve dose from the discharge of art~ficlal
Environmental
radionuclldes 1s about 0 14 mSv In a year and
the collective effective dose about 10 man Sv pollution
In a year or 0.0002 mSv when averaged
throughout the entire population.
- -
Jischarges 30/0
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

10 Nuclear power

Nuclear reactors have been producing at Sizewell: a number of older stations have
30 electr~c~ty
slnce the 1950s, and the stopped operating.
m?3@T~ electr~c~tysupply ~ndustrynow operates
Nuclear reactors
power reactors at twelve sltes In the UK. Some Nuclear reactors depend for their operation
of these contaln two stat~ons,together they on a reaction between neutrons and the atomic
produce about 20% of the electric power nuclei of the fuel. Uranium, the fuel for
generated in the UK. The newest reactor is reactors in the UK, consists principally of two
Power station sites isotopes, uranium-235 and uranium-238. In
Operating
natural uranium, the fuel for early reactors,
0 Closed those isotopes are in the proportion of 0.7%
Other nuclear sites
and 99.3%, respectively, by weight. The
enriched uranium for later reactors contains
Operating
about 2.5% of uranium-235.
Energy 1s released when a uran~um-235
nucleus absorbs a neutron and undergoes
fiss~on,that IS, ~tspllts Into two large energetic
fragments or fiss~onproducts, accompan~ed
by the release of several h ~ g henergy or fast
neutrons and some gamma radlat~on
The neutrons are slowed In the reactor so
that they Induce further fiss~onsIn the
uran~um-235such neutrons are often called
thermal neutrons and the reactors that rely
upon them thermal reactors By contrast,
when a nucleus of uranlum-238 absorbs a
j~zewell fast neutron ~tbecomes uranlum-239, whlch
F
Bradwe" decays to form pluton~um-239Thls wlll also
3Dungeness
' fiss~onand capture neutrons to form
h~fll&as
u.t@in'
I k 1~k
;Ok - lsotopes of add~t~onal
amerlclum or curlum
act~n~des such as
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
The fuel in a nuclear reactor is assembled in
an array called the core which also contains
the moderator, a material, generally water or
graph~te,that slows or thermal~sesthe neutrons
Control rod
Fuel
A coolant, usually water or gas, conducts heat
away from the fuel and then passes through
heat exchangers to make steam. The steam then
drives turb~negenerators to make electricity
The maln types of reactor designed In the U K
use graph~teas a moderator and pressurised
carbon dioxide gas as the coolant the early
types are called Magnoxreactors and the
later types Advanced Gas Cooled Reactors
(ACR). Most other countries use Pressurised
Water Reactors (PWR) where water acts both
as moderator and as coolant: the newest
reactor at Slzewell IS a PWR
The fuel is sealed in metal conta~ners,and
the core 1s contained In a pressure vessel.
Massive concrete sh~eld~ng helps to absorb
the Intense radiation em~ttedby the core
dur~ngand after operation A building
further conta~nsthe reactors and usually the
heat exchangers.
Control rod
'
 RADIATION

Fresh fuel is only mildly radioactive and can
be handled without shielding. Once in the
reactor, however, there is an enormous
increase of activity due mainly to the fission
products in the fuel; this means that an
accident at the reactor could release
significant activity. After removal from the
reactor, the spent fuel remains hot and must
be cooled as well as shielded to reduce
melting and prevent human exposure.
Waste management
In Chapter 9 we descr~bedthe d~scharge
of effluents from the nuclear fuel cycle, but
there are also other radioactwe wastes.
Nuclear They fall ~ n t othree broad categor~esaccording
power to actlv~tylow level, ~ntermed~ate level, and
hlgh level
Waste Low level wastes conslst of items such as
management paper, cloth~ng,and laboratory equipment
that have been used In areas where rad~oactlve
substances are handled, as well as contaml-
nated so11and bu~ld~ng materials lntermed~ate
level wastes Include Ion exchange materials
that are used In the treatment of gaseous
and l ~ q u ~
effluents
d before they are d~scharged
& conrain varlous raaionu
general
"LfrVII
to the environment, the sludges that
accumulate in the cooling ponds where spent
fuel is stored, and materials contaminated
with plutonium. In the UK, high level waste
refers only to the highly active liquid produced
when spent fuel is reprocessed. In countries
not committed to reprocessing, spent fuel
itself is regarded as high level waste.
The aims of waste management are to
process the wastes in such a way as to make
them suitable for storage and disposal and to
dispose of them so that there are no unaccept-
able risks to present and future generations.
Here disposal implies simply that there is no
intention to retrieve them rather than that it
would be impossible to do so.
Low level wastes do not generally need
processing: they can be packaged, sometimes
after compaction, and disposed of directly to
an authorised burial site. Most waste in this
category from the nuclear fuel cycle is
disposed of in shallow burial facilities at a site
near Sellafield in Cumbria.
Most ~ntermed~ate level wastes do not occur
In a form su~tablefor d~rectd~sposal,they
have to be m~xedInto an Inert mater~alsuch as
concrete, b~tumenor resln In the past, some
of these wastes were dumped at sea, but
slnce that has been embargoed, all are stored
at the varlous nuclear s~tesaround the country
awaltlng dec~s~on on the method of d~sposal
Among the opt~ons1s a repository deep
underground in good geological condit~ons

l d As In other countries, all the hlgh level waste

b I
I c produced In the UK 1s stored In one form or
C L
b 0 another L~quldwaste from reprocessing
;r
i r
operations 1s kept In spec~alcooled tanks at
I
L
Sellafield Fac~llt~es
to sol~dlfy~tby lncorporatlon
I I
I 4 In vltreous mater~alalso exlst at Sellafield
The glass blocks w ~ lbe
l stored for several
LIVING WITH RADIATION

decades to allow them

to cool before eventual
disposal, probably
underground.

Decommissioning
There has been no
Steel
complete decommissioning casing
-
of major nuclear facilltles so
far rn the UK, although V~trrf~ed
practical experience has -
waste

been garned on the

prototype advanced gas
cooled reactor at Sellafield.
The closure of some
Magnox reactors and the
fact that others are
approaching the end of
useful life have, however,
focused attention on the problems
associated with the process.
Decommissronrng of the more radioactive
parts of a reactor will require strlct control of
operations to avoid excessive radiation doses
to workers, complicated techniques of remote
handllng wrll be essential Large volumes of
low and rntermedrate level radroact~vewaste
wrll anse, and a management strategy to
optlmrse the protect~onof workers and the
publ~cwill need to be devlsed

Disposal criteria
There has been considerable discussion of
the crrterla to be used In judging the
acceptabilrty of waste disposal methods both
from a radiological protect~onpoint of view
and from the wider social perspective.
The consensus would seem to be that people
In future generations should be protected to
the same degree as they would be at
present. However, it is drffrcult to translate
this requrrement into practical standards of
radiological protection: for example, activity
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

may only emerge from a deep repository here. The most ethical answer would be to
many thousands of years later, and we have assume that present conditions persist and
no idea what the habits or ways of life of our that harm to future generations is of equal
descendants will be so far into the future. importance as harm to this generation. This
response must of course be tempered by the
NRPB advice on radiological protection
uncertainties of making predictions of potential
criteria for the disposal of solid radioactive
effects centuries and millennia from now.
waste is intended to limit future risks to
acceptable levels. It recommends that the
risk of a serious health effect among the
most exposed groups of people from a single
disposal site should not exceed 1 in 100 000
annually. NRPB recognises the uncertainties
,if 0 in the risk calculations and furthermore that
calculations extending a million years or
Nuclear
more into the future are scientifically
power uncertain. For disposal to land of low and
intermediate level wastes, the regulatory
Disposal authorities have set a target for a single
criteria repository: the annual risk of death for the
people at greatest risk at any time should be
no more than 1 in 1000000.

A second requirement is to apply the

principle that all exposures should be as low
as reasonably achievable once economic and
social factors have been taken into account.
This means that the various options
for managing a particular type of waste -
including treatment, immobilisation,
packaging and dlsposal - should be compared
on the basis of the associated risks, costs,
and other less quantifiable but no less
important factors. Some of this comparison
will be within the scope of radiological
protection, but other influences could
determine the eventual decision.

The difficult questlon for soc~etyabout waste

dlsposal 1s what werght to give now to a
mathematical probab~l~ty of harmful effects
In the drstant future Thls problem 1s not
pecul~arto waste disposal nor to rad~olog~cal
protectron, although ~tIS part~cularlypolnted
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

11 Nuclear
emergencies
11
An emergency may arise at a nuclear and extended in the unlikely event of a more
installation and lead to the accidental release severe accident. Nuclear
of radioactive material, its dispersion beyond emergencies
Should an accident occur at a reactor, for
the boundary of the site, and the need for
example, various radionuclides in gaseous,
urgent measures to protect the public.
volatile, or particulate form could be expelled
In some circumstances, the release may be
to the atmosphere. They would then be
brief, in others prolonged. Although such
borne away in a plume by the wind and be
accidents may be rare, it is prudent to be
dispersed and diluted. Some would fall to
prepared for them.
the ground, particularly if it were raining.
This chapter is mainly about emergency plans The concentration of radionuclides in the air
for nuclear accidents at major installations
such as reactor stations and the provisions in
the UK for protecting the public. The same
approach more or less applies to serious
accidents in any other circumstance, such as
transport or military operations, that could ateri
result in the release of radionuclides.

To ensure that there IS adequate protectron

agalnst acc~dents,the Health and Safety I
Execut~veas I~cens~ng authorrty requires a
detalled safety analys~sof major nuclear
~nstallationssuch as reactors Thrs analys~s
~dent~fiespotentral acc~dentsequences that
mrght lead to the release of radronucl~des
The sequence leadlng to the largest release
that can reasonably be foreseen 1s called a
reference accideni Emergency plans are
based on rt, but they could be strengthened
L
Dlspersron and depostbon from a r a d ~ o a c t ~ v e p l u ~ g
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
would decrease rapidly downwind from the
site as would the attendant hazard: even so,
appreciable activity could be deposited on
the ground at considerable distances.
Countermeasures
It may be necessary to take action to reduce
the radiation dose to the people living
nearby. Various countermeasures could be
undertaken singly or in combination.
People may be adv~sedto stay ~ndoorsor
even leave home until the plume has blown
over or the release has been stopped People
11
could take non-radloactlve lodlne tablets to
Nuclear prevent radloactlve Iodine reachlng the
emergencies thyrold gland. It may also be necessary to
. . . . Winistty of Defer
. .
introduce temporary restrictions on the
distribut~onof milk and vegetables and other
Emergency
arrcmgements foods produced locally. Some easy
countermeasures might be taken such as
hosing roads and paths or cutting and
removing grass from gardens so as to remove
surface activity.
When the emergency has passed, it may be
necessary to introduce other
countermeasures during a prolonged
recovery period so as to protect the public
from the residual activity.
Emergency arrangements
There are elaborate and well-rehearsed plans
for dealing wlth nuclear emergencles In the UK
and for those that m~ghtoccur overseas and
affect the UK.
Every nuclear site in the UK must by law
have an emergency plan and let the local
people know about it. The plan will involve
the operator's staff, the local authority, and
the emergency services. Government
departments and agencies and NRPB will
also become involved: each will deploy its
radiological resources and expertise.
Scottish Offic
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Foo
3nd the Regions
Nelsh Office
Vorthern Ireland Offi~
lepartment of Healt
iealth and Safety Executive
Fnvironment Age., , ,
In the early stages of an accident, the
operator will advise the police on measures
to protect the public. Soon a coordinating
centre away from the site will be set up at
which all the participants, with a government
technical adviser, will agree actions to protect
the public: these will include environmental
monitoring as well as appropriate
countermeasures. Arrangements will be
made to brief the news media.
The natlonal response to a nuclear emergency
will be coordinated by the Department of
Trade and Industry In London or by the
Scott~shOff~ceIn Edinburgh for accidents In
Scotland Several government departments
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

and agencles will partic~pateIn the preparat~on Intervention standards

of briefings for mlnlsters and parl~ament Taklng countermeasures after acc~dentsIS
The Department of Trade and Industry IS also another example of the procedure that ICRP
respons~blefor notify~ngoverseas governments calls Interventlon We have seen In Chapter 5
and lnternatlonal organlsatlons that Interventlon must be justified and
optimlsed It IS only necessary to add that
The frequency and scale of exercises to test
countermeasures must be taken to avo~d
the emergency arrangements are determined
by the Health and Safety Executive. doses h~ghenough to cause obv~ousInjury In
anyone exposed - but especially chlldren
Accidents occurring overseas should in
general have less radiological significance NRPB has recommended Emergency Reference
than accidents in the UK simply because of
Levels (ERL) of dose for the introduction of
countermeasures to protect the public: these
the greater distances for the contaminants to
travel. However, the Chernobyl disaster showed are used to identify which actions would be
that there could be consequences far away most suitable in particular circumstances.
For each countermeasure, there is a lower and
and led to development of a response plan emergencies
under the aegls of the Department of the upper level of dose. Below the first, the
countermeasure is unlikely to be worthwhile,
Env~ronment,Transport and the Regions.
above the second, it would be worthwhile ~n MMhtbx;
This plan includes an international notification most (
scheme to which the UK subscribes and a
national detection scheme known as the
Radioactive Incident Monitoring Network.
RIMNET has an array of automatic instruments 15
around the
country to
detect
increases
in gamma One outcome of the Chernobyl accident was
dose rates. the introduction by the European Commission
This system of regulations on the radioactive contamination
would also of food; they apply in all member states.
be an
important
source of
information
after an
accident in

-
the UK.

RIMNET
monitoring
station I
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

These European interventions levels are

rather stringent in terms of the dose that
might be averted by introducing them. NRPB
extended the approach to drinking water but
noted that a general relaxation of all the levels
by an order of magnitude could be justified.

Minor incidents
Discrete quantities of radioactive material
and radiation sources are widely used in
general industry, research organisations, and
hospitals and they are routinely transported
between locations, so incidents and m~shaps,
such as damage or loss, occasionally occur.
-
In the absence or failure of appropriate
Nuclear
contingency
- . plans, police forces are able to

activate the National Arrangements for

lnc~dentslnvolvlng Rad~oactlvltyCoord~nated
Minor by NRPB, NAlR draws on the sewlces of
/nodents experts at lnstltutlons around the country -
prlnc~pallylarge hospitals - to prov~de
assistance for radlolog~calprotection
 LIVINC WITH RADIATION
12 Electromagnetic
fields and radiation
We are all exposed to electromagnetic fields
from a variety of sources that use electrical
energy. These fields exist as electromagnetic
waves with a wide range of wavelengths and
frequencies. They occupy the region of the
electromagnetic spectrum that ends in virtually
static fields and is bordered by optical
radiations. The reason we call them electro-
magnetic fields rather than electromagnetic
radiations is because of our separate interest
in the electric and magnetic components,
particularly at extremely low frequencies.
'YO
12
Wavelength and frequency are inversely
related to each other, so the lower the Elmtrvtnagnetr'c
frequency the longer the wavelength and vlce fields and 1
versa Th~schapter IS about electromagnet~c radiation I
fields (EMF) with frequencies less than
300 CHz where the wavelength In alr IS 1 mm
It ~ncludes,for example, the electrlclty malns
frequency of 5 0 Hz wlth a wavelength of
6000 km When the strength of a field
changes with tlme, as for alternat~ngcurrent
supplles of electricity, ~tIS sald to be
tlme varylng
EEectmmagnetic
fields and
radiation
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
Non-~on~s~ng rad~ation1s the term generally
applied to fields In this reglon of the electro-
magnetic spectrum and to rad~ationsin the
ne~ghbouringoptlcal region In contrast to
lonlsing radiation, exposure to artific~al
electromagnetic fields from some parts of
the spectrum, such as power and
broadcasting frequencies, IS much greater
than that from natural fields
Common sources
The most common sources of exposure to
time-varying electromagnetic fields are
12 electrical power lines, electrical appliances at
home and work, and various radio, television,
Uectmmagnetic
and radiotelephonetransmitters. There is a
fields and
common low level of exDosure to radio-
radiation frequency radiation everywhere that rad~oor
telev~sionsignals are recelved The general
Common publlc may also be exposed to low level
fields from mlcrowave communlcatrons links,
sources
radar systems, and common products such
as televisron and computer d~splays
Higher exposures can arlse momentarily
close to moblle telephones and other
portable rad~oantennas
The degree of exposure to these fields
depends on the strength of the source and
the distance from it Field strength decreases
rapidly wlth dlstance In the case of direct~onal
sources such as mlcrowave dishes, strength
also decreases rapidly out of the main beam
Hlgh power broadcast systems and highly
directional radar systems do not generally
give significant exposure to electromagnetlc
fields except for maintenance workers or
engineers Mill~onsof people, however, come
close to electrical appliances where the
associated electromagnet~cfields cause
uneven and part~alexposure of the body
These fields may be characterlsed by electr~c
field strength and magnet~cflux denslty
During recent decades, the use of electrical
energy has Increased substant~allyto
supply power at mains frequency and for
broadcasting and telecommunicat~onsAt the
rad~ofrequenciesused in broadcasting, human
exposure will have increased In proport~on
with power, at telecommunicat~onsfrequencies,
the prol~feratlonof mob~letelephones will
have Increased the exposure of those who
use them The greater use of electrical
applrances In homes w~llhave Increased
exposure to 50 Hz fields but to what degree
is not clear the magnetlc fields, for Instance,
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
depend in a complex way on domestic wiring
and earthing practice and on the currents
flowing in cables and wires.
Immediate effects
The interaction of electromagnetic fields with
the human body and the harmful effects they
may have depend on frequency.
With static electric fields - that is, fields with
no time variation - we can sense the electric
charge induced on the surface of the body
by the way it affects the hairs on the head.
For most people, this becomes annoying at
electric field strengths above 25 kV m-'
(kilovolts per metre). In guidelines on human
exposure to electromagnetic fields, NRPB
advises that this annoying sensation should
be avoided.
Static magnetic fields, it would seem, do not
produce any detrimental effects on people
exposed for short per~odsat magnetic flux
densities up to 2 T (tesla).Moreover, long-
term exposure up to 200 mT (millitesla)should
not have any adverse effects.
Electromagnetic fields at frequencies below
100 kHz or so, which include the electric
mains frequency of 50 Hz, can induce
electric charge on the surface of the body
and electric current within the body. Electric
fields from high voltage power lines, for
example, can make body hairs vibrate,
although most people would not notice this
at field strengths below 12 kV m-' or so. In
some circumstances, moreover, people can
experience annoying microshocks from
metal objects.
Volunteer experiments have shown that
exposure to intense, low frequency magnetic
fields can induce electric currents throughout 12
the human body which stimulate nerves. Electtvmagnetic
Exposure to much less intense time-varying fields and
fields can cause faint, flickering sensations -
mdiution
magnetic phosphenes - due to electrical
effects on the cells in the retina. NRPB
guidance on exposure to electromagnetic
fields is intended to avoid such effects; it
therefore recommends that no current
density greater than 10 mA m-2(milliamperes
per square metre) should be induced in
tissues of the central nervous system. This is
about ten times the typical current density
generated by normal nerve activity.
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

Electric
and magnetic
fields from
power lines

12
Eiedmmag
fiejds and
radiation At frequencies hlgher than 100kHz, the major radiofrequency burns and adverse effects
blologlcal effect IS heatlng Radlofrequency (RQ from heating either of localised tissues or of
Common burns are also posslble at frequencies below the whole human body. Prolonged rises in
the microwave reglon of the electromagnet~c body temperature of 1 C or more can cause
sources
spectrum, that IS, below 300MHz they are effects such as heat exhaustion or reduced
caused by the flow of current to the body mental performance. They can be avoided,
through a small area of contact, such as a however, by restricting the whole-body SAR
flngertlp, from a badly earthed conducting in a radiofrequency or microwave field to
object In a radlofrequency field 0.4W kg-' (watts per kilogram). For
comparison, metabolic processes during rest
When the conditions of exposure are such
and normal muscular activity produce
that the dominant effect on the whole body is
about 1 to 10 W kg-'. In addition,
heating from induced radiofrequency currents,
restrictions on localised SAR can prevent
the increase in temperature is much more
adverse effects on temperature-sensitive
likely to occur in narrow parts of the body
tissues and organs such as the lens of the
such as the wrists or ankles. At microwave
eye and the developing embryo or fetus as
frequencies, heating results mainly from the
well as on the less sensitive tissues of the
alignment and relaxation of electrically
trunk and limbs.
polarised molecules - mostly water - in the
body. Body tissues with a high water content,
Between frequencies of 10 and 300GHz,
such as muscle, absorb power more readily
which have poor penetration into the body,
than tissue with a low water content: in
heating is largely confined to the surface of
technical terms, they have a greater specific .
the body. The restriction recommended by
energy absorption rate or SAR.
NRPB is expressed in terms of the power
The guidelines from NRPB on restricting density incident on the body, its value being
exposure are intended to prevent I00W m-2 (watts per square metre).
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
Mobiie
te/ephons
and base
statlan
Most people can sense pulsed radlat~onof
sufflc~entlntenslty between 200 MHz and
6 CHz as a buzzlng or cllcklng nolse rn the
head It IS thought to be caused by a small
but rapld Increase In temperature when the
rad~ofrequencyenergy IS absorbed thls
generates a sound wave that st~mulatesthe
cochlea Although there IS no ev~dencethat
thls effect IS harmful, lt can be annoylng
~fprolonged NRPB advrses therefore that
cond~t~ons of exposure ~nwhrch ~tmlght
occur should be avo~ded
All of the NRPB guldel~nevalues given above
are bas~crestrlctlons applylng to
occupational and publlc exposures wlthout
dlstrnctron but not to medlcal procedures
They are supported by a set of rnvestlgatlon
levels expressed ~npract~cal,measurable
quantltres, compliance wlth whrch ensures
that the bas~crestrrctlons are not exceeded
For t~me-varylngelectromagnetlc fields,
quantltatlve restr~ct~ons
are related to average
(root mean square, rms) values
Although the Immediate effects of human
exposure to electromagnetic fields are well
understood and restr~ct~onsare ~nplace to
avold them, few people are exposed to such
a degree that they experience the effects.
What IS of more Interest IS the poss~b~llty of
harmful effects on thelr health later ln llfe from
the levels of exposure In ordlnaty circumstances
Delayed effects
The delayed effect that causes most concern
IS the posslblllty that electromagnet~c
fields
m~ghtIncrease the r~skof contracting cancer
As a result, programmes of ep~dem~olog~cal
and brolog~calresearch have been pursued
by NRPB and other sclentlfic organlsat~ons
~nadvanced countries NRPB also has an
expert adv~sorygroup whlch monltors and
reports on developments
There has been a considerable number of Q&mmagnegi
ep~demiolog~cal studres of exposure to fieids and
electromagnet~cfields and mal~gnantdrsease
radiation
They rnclude power frequency, radrofrequency
and microwave fields, exposure of chlldren
and adults In the home, exposure of adults
at work ~nthe electrlclty and electronrcs
lndustr~esThere has also been a number of
extensive reviews by the NRPB advisory
group, for example, and by the US National
Academy of Sciences among others,
Neither the studies nor the reviews have
shown clearly that electromagnetrc fields
grve rise to cancer In other words, causatron
has not been establrshed Some ep~demro-
logical studres do, however, suggest a weak
assoclatlon between exposure to power
frequency fields rn the home and ch~ldhood
cancer, others po~ntto a posslble llnk between
exposure at work and bra~ncancer In adults
Such epidemiological studies face many
difficulties. First of all, they must be based on
a substantial number of malignancies and
then every effort has to be made to obtain a
good measure of actual exposures. It is also
important to eliminate the possibility that
other environmental factors may confound
the outcome.
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

A good test of the significance of such studies affecting cellular changes in a manner not yet
is whether, singly or collectively, they establish understood. On balance there is no consistent
a proportionate relationship between exposure and persuasive evidence that electromagnetic
and effect - in this case exposure and cancer. fields influence any of the accepted stages of
In contrast to ionising radiations (Chapter 41, cancer development.
electromagnetic fields have so far failed to
It follows from the above that there IS no
pass this test.
basls on whlch to quantlfy the risk of cancer
from ordlnary exposure and so establrsh
standards of protectlon The subject IS so
Important, however, that ep~dem~olog~cal and
blologlcal research will need to be focused
on the Issue of causatlon Should a causal
relat~onshlpbe established, NRPB would not
12
hestate to offer adv~ceto government on
.Electmmagnnetic further protectlon of the whole community or
fields and any sectlon of lt from exposure to electro-
mdiation magnetic fields

Delayed effects
e+*+.&;;" ,,?'**rrrrs

There are other cnterla for causatlon, lnclucl~r~g

corroborative evidence, none IS presently
sat~sfiedIt IS dlfflcult to lmaglne how power
frequency electromagnet~cfields could have
any blologrcal effect the photon energies are
many orders of magn~tudebelow that at
whlch lonlsatlon occurs or chemlcal bonds
are disrupted What happens Instead IS that
energy IS absorbed by the movement of
electrlc charge through and around body
cells However, thls movement IS llkely to be
so mlnute as to be completely masked by
that whlch occurs naturally
Experimental studres wlth anlmals and cells
have falled to prove that electromagnetlc
flelds can damage DNA and In so dolng cause
mutations In genes or chromosomes that mlght
in~t~ate cancer They admlt of the posslbllity,
however - although the lnformatlon IS at
best equivocal - that electromagnetlc fields
mlght promote the cancer process by
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

13 Optical
radiation
Opt~calradiat~onlncludes the most fam~l~ar
forms of rad~atronto which we are all
exposed - ultraviolet lrght and radrant heat
It covers three adjacent reglons of the
electromagnet~cspectrum, from the
ultraviolet with wavelengths from I00 to
400 nm, through the visrble from 400 to
770 nm, to the infrared wlth wavelengths
'-om 770 nm to l mm There IS also merrt
13
in defining ultraviolet subregions (UVA,UVB,
UVC) and rnfrared subregions (IRA, IRB, IRC) Optical
so as to describe biological effects. mdiation
Opt~calrad~at~on does not penetrate far into
human t~ssue,so the eyes and skrn are the
organs most at rrsk Harmful effects may be
subdlv~dedlnto two marn categories,
photochemical and thermal Photochemical

.. " -

. ., .
Photokeratitrs . 1

Photochemical cataract oageing

Lens yellowing :ancers

Visible - Retinal
-
injury: :: - - r
_ - a
, .-.
,
<
-
I . -
_ _ -
-
- -
. . . = .
_ / - =

-
. . . I

IRA .Thermal catarac - , n r -

.n-k:nal injur
~tim
11-r Ir
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
effects are assocrated malnly wlth the ultraviolet
and visible regions of the spectrum, thermal
effects wlth the Infrared and v~siblereglons
They may also be div~dedInto acute and chronic
categories Among the acute lnjurles to the
eye are photokeratltls or snowbl~ndness(arc
eye) and among the chron~cInjuries cataract
format~onErythema or sunburn IS the most
common acute Injury to the skln and cancers
the most serlous effect of chronlc exposure
Photochemical effects result from chemical
reactions In the body inltlated by the
13
absorption of photons as, for Instance, In the
Oph'caI Important process of vision and the synthesis
radiation of v~tarnlnD Other examples include
photokeratltls and erythema For each type
Llltraviolet of reaction, there IS a photon energy - the
radiation threshold - below which the effect will not
occur, thls translates into a threshold
frequency or upper wavelength llmlt
With longer wavelengths, the photons
do not have enough energy to initiate the
photochemical reactions; thermal effects,
which lead to injury when the molecular
bonds of proteins and enzymes are disrupted,
become dominant in the infrared region.
How much disruption and damage occurs
depends on how large the temperature rise
is and how long it lasts.
Although the sun IS the main source of optlcal
radiat~on,artlfic~alsources are also Important
They Include arcs, d~schargeand incandescent
dev~ces,and lasers They range from germic~dal
and horticultural lamps which emit radlatlon
In the ultrav~oletregion, to halogen cooker
hobs and heaters In the Infrared reglon
Ultraviolet radiation
There IS more concern about protecting people
against ultrav~oletradlatlon [UVR) than any
other reglon of the optlcal spectrum because
of the stead~lylncreaslng Incidence of skrn
cancer NRPB has an extenslve monitoring
and research programme on ultrav~olet
radlatlon and an expert advisory group on
the hazards to human health
Although ultraviolet wavelengths range from
100 to 400nm, solar ultraviolet radiation
reaching the surface of the earth extends only
from around 290 to 400nm because the
ultraviolet radiation at shorter wavelengths is
absorbed by the atmosphere. In doing so, it
interacts with oxygen to produce ozone
mostly in a protective layer between altitudes
of 15 and 30 km.
Sunburn In some people IS followed by an
Increased production of melanln and
Increased plgmentatlon A suntan offers only
mlnlmal protection agalnst further exposure
to ultrav~oletradlat~onand IS not an lndlcatlon
 LIVINC WITH RADIATION
of good health. Apart from circumstances in
which a sunburn is severe, erythema is not
itself a serious injury. Each exposure, no matter
how slight, increases the risk of a serious
effect - skin cancer.
There is clear evidence that ultraviolet
radiation, and in particular UVB, can cause
skin cancers of the non-melanoma type.
For most people, the sun is the main source of
exposure and of risk, but there is also some
risk to those who are intermittently exposed
to artificial sources at work. So the hazards
associated with exposure to solar radiation
provide a measure against which to judge the
hazards of artificial sources such as sunbeds
or ultraviolet lamps in the workplace.
Non-melanoma skin cancers are mainly of
the kinds known as basal cell carcinomas and
squamous cell carcinomas. They are fairly
common in white people but rarely fatal.
The overall incidence is difficult to assess:
reported cases account for over 5% of
registered malignancies in the UK and under
0.5% of cancer deaths, but rates are
increasing every year.
These cancers occur most frequently on parts
of the body exposed to the sun, such as the
ears, face, head and hands, and become more
common wlth lncreaslng age Epldem~olog~cal
stud~eslnd~catethat the risk of both cancers
can be related to cumulative ultrav~olet
rad~ationexposure, although the evldence IS
stronger for squamous cell carcinomas UVB
has been recognlsed for some time as belng 1 1
carclnogenlc In laboratory anlmals, there IS
Increasing ev~dencethat UVA, whlch penetrates
more deeply into the skln, also contributes to
the lnduct~onof cancer
Malignant melanoma is the main cause of
death from skin cancer, particularly in young has a role in causing these effects.
people, although the incidence is less than
that for non-melanoma types. The risk of
developing malignant melanoma has increased
markedly in white people: the annual incidence
in the UK is about 10 new cases per 100000
of the population, a doubling of the rate in
less than two decades. The disease is relatively
significant for young people: it constitutes
1 in 12 cancers and 1 in 25 cancer deaths
for those aged 2 0 to 39 years.
Flgures are h~gherfor people w ~ t hlarge
numbers of naevi or moles and those wlth
several unusual moles, for those wlth fa~rsk~n,
13
red or blond hair, and for those wlth a
tendency to freckle, to sunburn and not to
Optical
tan Both acute sunburn and regular tudiation
exposure at work or at lelsure probably
contribute to the r ~ s kof malignant melanoma
It also seems that excessive exposure to the
sun durrng the first 2 0 years of l ~ f eincreases
the r ~ s klater on, although the preclse nature
of thls relatlonsh~pIS uncertain
As with all malignant disease, early diagnosis
and treatment of malignant melanoma
is important for patients. Since protection is
better than cure, NRPB has made
recommendations to minimise the effects of
ultraviolet radiation on human health.
1-
phkne m 1
RP $4pec1all~
in childhood
p$t@qs&firhersun from 11 to 3 o'cl
:!e$r$hitable
. . - . protective clothes and a hat
-
Bk
- a * or
-- . sunscreens
.
Long-term exposure to the sun causes
photoageing of the skin, characterised by a
leathery wrinkled appearance and loss of
elasticity. Extensive biological studies have
provided evidence that ultraviolet radiation
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

Some degree of exposure to ultrav~olet

radiation is beneficial in that it brings about
the synthes~sof vitamin D in the skin, which
st~mulatesthe absorption of calcium from
the gut to bones, Although this may be
important for some peaple on a restricted
diet, for most people the harmful effects on
the skin are far more significant
Brief overexposure of the eyes to ultraviolet
radiation can cause photokeratitis and
photoconjunct~vitis- inflammation of the
cornea and conjunct~va,respectively.
There have been few appropriate studies with
Repeated exposure IS considered to be a
animals, but acute exposures to UVB at levels
major cause of non-malignant changes such
above the threshold for photokeratitis have
as pterygium - an overgrowth of the
induced opacities at the front of the lens.
conjunctiva on to the cornea.
NRPB monitors the levels of solar radiation
Epidemtologicaldata on the formation of
throughout Great Britain. It has a network of
cataracts in highly exposed people suggest
six sites, one at every two degrees of latitude
that cumulative exposure to ultraviolet
from the south of England to the north of
radiat~onis an important factor in the
Scotland. Continuous measurements are made
development of cataracts.
of visible radiation, UVA, and erythemally
the degree to which
0 weighted ultraviolet radiation. The accumulating
exposure is a significant Lerw~ck
data are useful for examining the effects of
risk factor for
ultraviolet radiation on public health and the
cataracts
influence of climatic and other factors on
generally
exposures at ground level.
is however
unclear. Other optical radiations
In this section, we shall refer to visible radiation
and infrared radiation but dwell on lasers.

Human beings are adapted to the v~s~ble

rad~ationfrom the sun Eyes are normally
protected from acute Injury by bright l~ght
through ~nvoluntaryresponses such as bl~nk~ng
or avert~ngone's gaze. These actlons protect
the retlna from vis~ble- and UVA - radiat~on
that would otherw~sebe focused on ~ t .
Blue l~ghtIS, however, the major hazard for
WE' the retlna and IS responsible for photochem~cal
m$~pibiir~M injury. As the sun sets and reddens, the rays
sits in become less hazardous
$rihn
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
Sunlight probably causes more optical injuries
than artificial sources of optical radiation.
However, some modern sources can have
significant potential for injury, possibly within
the reflex time for aversion. With some
sources such as lasers, it is important to have
precautions that do not rely upon the
aversion response.
Research shows that the retina can degenerate
when subjected to abnormally high levels
of ambient illumination, particularly if the
illumination is constant. It may well be that
continual exposure to light plays a part in
retinal ageing, a view confirmed by the
similarities between changes in the retina from
ageing and those caused by exposure to
intense illumination.
Anterior parts of the eye, and specifically the
lens, may be damaged by IRA radiation.
Infrared radiation can also produce cataracts
by thermal processes and burn the cornea.
Experience indicates, however, that such injuries
can be prevented by protective eyewear.
The main hazard to the skin from intense
sources of visible and infrared radiations, such
as lasers, is thermal burning. These devices
deserve special mention.
100 watt bulb
Laser
Lasers emit optical radrat~onat one or a few
discrete wavelengths throughout most of
the optical spectrum from 100 nm to 1 rnm
They are identified by the active med~um-
gas, liqu~dor solid - wrth solld lasers being
d~videdInto materials such as crystals and
sem~conductorsLasers are wrdely used in
commerce, ~ndustry,medlc~ne,and In the home
A laser differs from other sources of optical
radiation in that the beam is usually intense
and well collimated. The degree of harm that
the beam causes is related to the irradiance,
that is, the power per unit area. For other
sources, this quantity decreases steeply with
distance, but not necessarily with a laser
source. A laser beam in the visible or IRA .. .
region falling on the surface of the eye will be
focused nearly to a point; the result is that
the irradiance at the surface will be increased
by a factor of 100 000 or so at the retina.
The smallest value of irradiance likely to
cause harm is 25 W m-' in the visible region
for an aversion response of 0.25 s; it
corresponds to a power of 1 mW into a pupil
of 7 mm diameter for the same period. In the
visible region, with a helium-neon or ruby
laser for example, the potential harm is a
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
-

bas Al~gnment,barcoc- -. . a,

1152.6 prlntlng, measuremer

Carbon dloxlde 1 0 600 utting, weldrng, surg

A ,-rm ntertalnment, Surge!

rinting, measuremer

. .
Liquld Dye lasers

KUU

Sem~conductor Varlous 60C -. C

C
* . C . C . * ) ,

tnermal lesion or ~ n t reur

: la With a carbol L
dioxide laser, which emits in the infrared
region, lesions tend to occur in the cornea

International and national standards of

safety for lasers exist: they include values of
maximum permissible exposure, at various
wavelengths, that are likely to cause harm to
the eye. Values are also set for the skin itself
where the harm can range from a mild
erythema to severe burning of the skin and
supporting tissues.

A classification scheme has been devised

for laser products to indicate the degree of
hazard for the user. It ranges from class 1
products with enclosed beams, as in printers
or compact disc players, to class 4 products
with open h~gh-powerbeams, as in eng~neering
or entertainment. For lasers, the watchword
is precaution: damage can be done in the
bllnk of an eye.
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
Appendix A
Glossary
Absorbed dose Quantity of energy imparted
by ionising radiation to unit mass of matter such
as tissue. Unit gray, symbol Gy. 1 Cy = 1 joule per
kilogram.
Actinides A group of 1 5 elements with atomic
number from that of actinium (89) to lawrencium
( 1 03) inclusive. All are radioactive. Group includes
uranium, plutonium, americium, and curium.
Activity Attribute of an amount of a
radionuclide. Describes the rate at which transform-
ations occur in it. Unit becquerel, symbol Bq.
1 Bq = 1 transformation per second.
Advanced Gas Cooled Reactor A develop-
ment of the Magnox reactor, using enriched
uranium oxide fuel in stainless steel cladding.
AGR Advanced gas cooled reactor.
Alpha particle A particle consisting of
two protons plus two neutrons. Emitted by a
radionuclide.
Atom The smallest portion of an element that
can combine chemically with other atoms.
Atomic bomb See nuclear weapon.
Atomic mass The mass of an isotope of an
element expressed in atomic mass units, which are
defined as one-twelfth of the mass of an atom of
carbon-1 2.
Atomic number The number of protons in
the nucleus of an atom. Symbol Z.
Becquerel See activity.
Beta particle An electron emitted by the
nucleus of a radionuclide. The electric charge may
be positive, in which case the beta particle is
called a positron.
Appendk A
Brachytherapy Term applied to the use of
radiation sources in or on the body for treating Glossary
certain types of cancer.
Chromosomes Rod-shaped bodies found in
the nucleus of cells in the body. They contain the
genes, or hereditary constituents. Human beings
possess 23 pairs.
Collective dose Frequently used for collective
effective dose.
Collective effective dose The quantity
obtained by multiplying the average effective
dose by the number of people exposed to a
given source of ionising radiation. Unit man sievert,
symbol manSv. Frequently abbreviated to
collective dose.
Consumer products Personal and household
goods such as timepieces, smoke alarms, and gas
mantles that contain radioactive material for
functional reasons.
Cosmic rays High energy ionising radiations
from outer space. Complex composition at the
surface of the earth.
Current density The electric current or flow
of electric charge through a conducting medium,
such as tissue, per unit cross-sectional area. Unit
ampere per square metre, symbol A m-2.
Decay The process of spontaneous
transformation of a radionuclide. The decrease in
the activity of a radioactive substance.
Decay product A nuclide or radionuclide
produced by decay. It may be formed directly
from a radionuclide or as a result of a series of
successive decays through several radionuclides.
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
Decommissioning The process of closing
down a nuclear reactor, removing the spent
fuel, dismantling some of the other
components, and preparing them for disposal.
Term may also be applied to other major
nuclear facilities.
Diagnostic radiology Term usually applied
to the use of X-rays in medicine for identifying
disease or injury in patients.
Disposal In relation to radioactive waste,
dispersal or emplacement in any medium without
the intention of retrieval.
DNA Deoxyribonucleic acid. The compound
that controls the structure and function of cells
and is the material of inheritance.
Appendix A
Dose General term for auantitv of ionisina ./
Glossary radiation. See absorbed dose, equivalent dose,
effective dose and collective effective dose.
Frequently used for effective dose.
Effective dose The quantity obtained by
multiplying the equivalent dose to various
tissues and organs by a weighting factor
appropriate to each and summing the products.
Unit sievert, symbol Sv. Tissue weighting factors
are tabulated in Chapter 2. Frequently
abbreviated to dose.
Electrical interaction A force of repulsion
acting between electric charges of like sign and a
force of attraction acting between electric charges
of unlike sign.
Electric field strength A measure of the
intensity of an electric field, Unit volt per metre,
symbol V m-'.
Electromagnetic field The region in which
electramagneticradiation from a source exerts an
influence on another object with or without there
being contact between them.
Electromagnetic radiation Radiation that
can be considered as a wave of electric and
magnetic energy travelling through a vacuum or a
material. Examples are gamma rays, X-rays,
ultraviolet radiation, light, infrared radiation and
radiofrequency radiation.
Electromagnetic spectrum All electromagnetic
radiations displayed as a continuum in order of
increasing frequency or decreasing wavelength.
Electromagnetic wave See electromagnetic
radiation.
Electron An elementary particle with low
mass, '1, 856 that of a proton, and unit negative
electric charge. Positively charged electrons, called
positrons, also exist. See also beta particle.
Electron volt Unit of energy employed in
radiation physics. Equal to the energy gained
by an electron in passing through a potential
difference of 1 volt. Symbol eV.
1 eV = 1 . 6 lo-"
~ joule approximately.
Element A substance with atoms all of the
same atomic number.
Emergency reference level One of a dual
set of doses likely to be averted by the
introduction of countermeasures to protect the
public from ionising radiation after a nuclear or
other serious accident.
EMF Electromagnetic field. Not to be
confused with the initials for electromotive force.
Enriched uranium Uranium in which the
content of the isotope uranium-235 has been
increased above its natural value of 0.7% by weight.
Equivalent dose The quantity obtained by
multiplying the absorbed dose by a factor to allow
for the different effectiveness of the various ionising
radiations in causing harm to tissue. Unit sievert,
symbol Sv. Radiation weighting factors are given in
Chapter 2.
ERL See emergency reference level of dose.
Erythema Reddening of the skin caused by
dilation of blood vessels.
Excitation A process by which radiation
imparts energy to an atom or molecule without
causing ionisation. Dissipated as heat in tissue.
Fallout The transfer of radionuclides
produced by nuclear weapons from the
atmosphere to earth; the material transferred.
Fast neutrons Conventionally, neutrons with
energies in excess of 0.1 MeV. Corresponding
velocity of about 4 x 1 O6 m S-I.
Fast reactors See nuclear reactor.
Fission Nuclear fission. A process in which a
nucleus splits into two or more nuclei and energy
is released. Frequently refers to the splitting of a
nucleus of uranium-235 into two approximately
equal parts by a thermal neutron with emission of
other neutrons.
Fission products Nuclides or radionuclides
produced as a result of fission.
- LIVING WITH RADIATION
. - -
Free radical A grouping of atoms that
normally exists in combination with other atoms
but can sometimes exist independently. Generally
very reactive in a chemical sense.
Frequency The number of complete cycles of
an electromagnetic wave in a second. Unit hertz,
symbol Hz. 1 Hz = 1 cycle per second.
Fusion Thermonuclear fusion. A process in
which,two or more light nucleiare formed into a
heavier nucleus and energy is released.
Gamma ray A discrete quantity of
electromagnetic energy without mass or charge.
Emitted by a radionuclide. Cf X-ray.
Geiger-Muller tube A glass or metal
envelope containing a gas at low pressure and two
electrodes. lonising radiation causes discharges,
which are registered as electric pulses in a counter.
The number of pulses is related to dose.
Genes The biological units of heredity. They
are arranged along the length of chromosomes.
Gray See absorbed dose.
Half-life The time taken for the activity of
a radionuclide to lose half its value by decay.
Symbol t'12.
Infrared radiation Electromagnetic radiation
capable of producing the sensation of heat and
found between light and radiofrequency radiations
in the electromagneticspectrum. Has subregions
IRA, IRB and IRC.
Ion Electrically charged atom or grouping
of atoms.
Ionisation The process by which a neutral
atom or molecule acquires or loses an electric
charge. The production of ions.
lonising radiation Radiation that
produces ionisation in matter. Examples are
alphaparticles, gamma rays, X-rays and neutrons.
When these radiations pass through the tissues
of the body, they have sufficient energy to
damage DNA.
lrradiance The power per unit area of optical
radiation. Unit watt per square metre, symbol W m 2 .
Isotope Nuclides with the same number of
protons but different numbers of neutrons. Not a
synonym for nuclide.
Laser Device which amplifies light and usually
produces an extremely narrow intense beam of a
single wavelength.
Light Electromagnetic radiation capable
of producing the sensation of vision and found
between ultraviolet and infrared radiations in the
electromagnetic spectrum.
Magnetic flux density A measure of the
magnetic effect induced in a medium by an external
field. Unit tesla, symbol T.
Magnox reactor A thermal reactor named
after the magnesium alloy in which the uranium
metal fuel is contained. The moderator is graphite
and the coolant is carbon dioxide gas.
Man sievert See collective effective dose.
Mass number The number of protons plus
neutrons in the nucleus of an atom. Symbol A.
Maximum permissible exposure The
irradiance likely to cause detectable damage to Appendix A
the human eye or skin from exposure to optical clossary
radiation. Unit watt per square metre, symbol W m-2. .. .
Moderator A material used in nuclear
reactors to reduce the energy and speed of the
neutrons produced as a result of fission.
Molecule The smallest portion of a
substance that can exist by itself and retain the
properties of the substance.
Mutation A chemical change in the DNA in
the nucleus of a cell. Mutations in sperm or egg
cells or their precursors may lead to inherited
effects in children. Mutations in body cells may
lead to effects in the individual.
Neutron An elementary particle with unit
atomic mass approximately and no electric charge.
Non-ionising radiation Radiation that does
not produce ionisation in matter. Examples are
ultraviolet radiation, light, infrared radiation and
radiofrequency radiation. When these radiations
pass through the tissues of the body they do not
have sufficient energy to damage DNA directly.
Nuclear fuel cycle The stages in which the
fuel for nuclear reactors is first prepared, then
used, and later reprocessed for possible use again.
Waste management is also considered part of
the cycle.
Nuclear medicine Term usually applied to
the use of radionuclides for diagnosing or treating
disease in patients.
Nuclear power Power obtained from the
operation of a nuclearreactor. Refers in the text
to electric power.
 LIVING WITH RADIATION
Nuclear power industry The industry
associated with the production of nuclear power.
In the United Kingdom, the preparation of fuel
for nuclear reactors, the operation of reactors, the
subsequent reprocessing of the fuel, and the
disposal of radioactive wastes.
Nuclear reactor A device in which nuclear
fission can be sustained in a self-supporting chain
reaction involving neutrons. In thermal reactors,
fission is brought about by thermal neutrons.
Nuclear weapon Explosive device
deriving its power from fission or fusion of nuclei
or from both.
Nucleus The core of an atom, occupying little
of the volume, contalnlng most of the mass, and
Appendix A
bear~ngposltlve electrlc charge
(%s~~y Nucleus of a cell The controll~ngcentre
.. .. . . of the basic unit of tissue. Contains the important
material DNA.
Nuclide A species of atom characterised by
the number of protons and neutrons and, in some
cases, by the energy state of the nucleus.
Optical radiation Electromagnetic radiation
comprising ultraviolet visible and infrared radiations.
Order of magnitude Quantity given to the
nearest power of ten. A factor of ten or so.
Ozone A form of oxygen gas which occurs
naturally in very small quantities in air. Most of
the ozone is in the stratosphere where it forms the
ozone layer.
Photographic film Film with emulsion
sensitive to ionising radiation. The degree of
blackening is related to dose.
Photon A quantum of electromagnetic
radiation.
Positron See beta particle.
Power density The power per unit cross
sectional area in an electromagnetic field. Unit
watt per square metre, symbol Wm-2.
Pressurised water reactor A thermal
reactor using water as both a moderator and
coolant. Uses enriched uranium oxide fuel.
Probability The mathematical chance that a
given event will occur.
Proton An elementary particle with unit
atomic mass approximately and unit positive
electric charge.
PWR Pressurised water reactor.
Radiation The process of emitting energy
as waves or particles. The energy thus radiated.
Frequently used for ionising radiation in the text
except when it is necessary to avoid confusion
with non-ionising radiation.
Radioactive Possessing the property of
radioactivity.
Radioactive waste Useless material
containing radionuclides. Frequently categorised
in the nuclear power industry according to activity
and other criteria given in Chapter 10, as low level,
intermediate level, and high level waste.
Radioactivity The property of radionuclides
of spontaneously emitting ionising radiation.
Radiobiology The study of the effects of
ionising radiation on living things.
Radiofrequency radiation Electromagnetic
radiation used for telecommunications and found
in the electromagneticspectrum at longer
wavelengths than infrared radiation.
RF See radiofrequency radiation.
Radiological protection The science and
practice of limiting the harm to human beings
from radiation.
Radionuclide An unstable nuclide that emits
ionising radiation.
Radiotherapy Term applied to the use
of radiation beams for treating disease, usually
cancers, in patients.
Reference accident One of a range of
accidents at a nuclear reactor or other nuclear
installation that can reasonably be foreseen in
safety analysis as giving rise to the most significant
release of radionuclides from the site.
Risk The probability of injury, harm or damage.
Risk factor The probability of cancer and
leukaemia or hereditary damage per unit equivalent
dose. Usually refers to fatal malignant diseases and
serious hereditary damage. Unit S v ' .
Scintillation counter A device containing
material that emits light flashes when exposed
to ionising radiation. The flashes are converted to
electric pulses and counted. The number of pulses
is related to dose.
Sievert See effective dose.
Silicon diode A device made of a silicon
compound in which current flows when exposed
to ionising radiation. The current is converted to
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

electrical pulses and counted. The number of

pulses is related to dose.
Specific energy absorption rate The rate at
which energy is absorbed by unit mass of tissue in
an electromagnetic field. Unit watt per kilogram,
symbol W k g ' .
SAR See specific energy absorption rate.
Thermal neutrons Neutrons that have been
slowed to the degree that they have the same
average thermal energy as the atoms or molecules
through which they are passing. The average energy
of neutrons at ordinary temperatures is about
0.025eV, correspondingto an average velocity of
2.2 x 103ms-'.
Thermal reactor See nuclear reactor.
Thermoluminescent material Material which,
having been irradiated, releases light in proportion
to the ionising radiation absorbed when it is
subsequently heated.
Ultraviolet radiation Electromagnetic
radiation found between X-rays and light in the
electromagneticspectrum. Has subregions UVA,
UVB, UVC.
UVR See ultraviolet radiation.
Visible radiation See light.
Waste management The control of
radioactive waste from creation to disposal.
Wavelength The distance between successive
crests of an electromagnetic wave passing through
a given material. Unit metre, symbol m.
X-ray A discrete quantity of electromagnetic
energy without mass or charge. Emitted by an
X-ray machine. Cf gamma ray.
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

Appendix B
Symbols and units
Appendix B
Scientific notation
Symbols It IS often more convenient to express the
and units numbers encountered In rad~olog~cal
protectlon ~nscrent~hcrather than decrmal
notatlon because of thelr magn~tude
Thls lnvolves the use of slgnlficant figures
wlthn desred l~mltsand mult~plicat~onby the 1%
appropriate power of ten Examples follow

I ..*

Prefixes
Some powers of ten have Special names and
symbols. These may be prefixed to units of
measurement: thus kilogram, symbol kg,
for 1 O3 gram; millimetre, symbol mm, for
1 O-' metre. A table of prefixes follows.
Symbols
Symbols are used extensively In radiological
protectlon. The elements are usually
represented by symbols, for example, C for
carbon, Ba for barlum, and Pb for lead
It is usual to indicate the mass number and
atomic number of a particular nuclide by a
superscript and subscriptthus:
carbon-1 4 by '2C,
barium-I 4 0 by I458Ba,
lead-210 by 2d,20Pb.
The atomic number is frequently omitted.
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

A table of common symbols follows.

When the symbol for a unit is shown with a
superscript of - 1 on its right, it signifies that
the quantity is being used in a fractional
context or to represent rate. Thus Sv h-'
means sievert per hour.
~f common symbols in radiological protectio~

Appendix B
Symbols
and units

Quantities and units for

ionising radiation
Some time ago, the un~tsfor the main
ionislng rad~at~on quantities were changed to
those used In this text Readers may come
across old units: this table shows how to
convert them to the new units.
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

Qumtltiesand units for

nan-ionking radiation

Jmen se
*adla -
- . ,n (In
Iryad~ance
.Radtant lr
Rad~ance
Radrant expos. -
Spectral irrad~anc~ +' Nm
ndela (cd).
,.*I
:t 2 2 ' .v s r -
1 Appendix B
SymboIs
and units
Spectral rad~ance
*The steradlan isrhs-thk u f i ~ t osolid
'ngth
f
(lo9 * * a
angle,

ar F:
*,-
*'11
* 5:"

Magnetic field strer a1 re per metre (A m-l)

YX density
4n 1 ~nno gnetlc med~a,

"qP*erel;eper 4q
- _. .-. .
8 -

. I t
~,

tt per kllbgt-am (W lq
 LIVING WITH RADIATION

Appendix C
NRPB publications
Appendix C
Apart from this book, NRPB publishes a wide NRPB has a site on the Internet at
range of material on radiological protection http://www.nrpb.org.uk,which includes
NRPB
for a professional and public readership. details of current publications. Publications

Documents of the NRPB, the prime

publications, contain formal advice and
findings on important issues with appropriate
supplementary material. Some are as
substantial as textbooks with definitive
treatment of radiological topics.

NRPB publishes the results of research in

scientific journals. Some scientific material
may also appear in the NRPB Report series
and technical matter in the NRPB
Memorandum series. Voluminous scientific
data are made available in NRPB Software;
personal computer codes are also produced.
News and reviews, articles and reports
appear in the Radiological Protection Bulletin
which is widely read by professionals.

At the popular end of the range of NRPB

publications are the At-a-Clcmce leaflets on
radiation topics for members of the public
generally and science pupils particularly; they
unfold to poster size. Similar publications are
prepared for industrial and other employees
in the Radiation-at-Work series. A video on
radon in the home has also been produced.
UK comparative scale of doses and limits (in mSv) and effects

300 Early death

300 50% survival

300 Threshold for early death

%
,

5
4..
t22
500
rnSB2
Threshold for nausea
Threshold for reduct~onof white blood cells
"A8

20 Worker dose llmlt

Actlon level for radon In homes

8 Average annual dose from all sources In Cornwall

2 Average annual dose from natural radlatlon

Average annual dose from radon In the home

Prlnc~palpubllc dose llmlt
0.4 Average annual dose from medrcal radlatlon
0.3 Maxlmum annual dose allowed for slngle slte

10 Hlghest annual dose from Sellafield discharges

33
F%
@J0.02 Slngle chest X-ray dose
@
10
;---
Average dose from fllght to Spaln

0.004 Average annual dose from weapons fallout

10.0011 Average annual dose from Chernobyl

0.0002 Average annual dose from nuclear power