Atomic Show #240 – Prof Gerry Thomas radiation health effects

Gerry Thomas, Professor of Molecular Pathology of the Imperial College of London, has a subspecialty in the study of the health effects of radiation. She strongly believes that “public involvement and information is a key part of academic research,” and she is “actively involved in the public communication of research, particularly with respect to radiation protection and biobanking.”

She was deeply involved in determining the health effects of the Chernobyl accident, particularly with regard to the effects of iodine-131 ingestion on thyroid cancer. She also studied the health effects of Cs-137 released during that accident and found out that there were none due to the short biological half-life, the patchy nature of deposition and natural cleansing effects of weather.

Dr. Thomas is an excellent public speaker and has been featured in a number of educational efforts including a talk at the United Nations University during which she highlighted the misconceptions associated with radiation health impacts during reactor accidents. Ben Heard of Decarbonisesa.com classifies her as one of his Credible Hulks – people whose knowledge is deep and whose words are worthy of attention.

Dr. Thomas and I talked about her experiences in studying Chernobyl, the vast difference in initial response between the Chernobyl accident and the Fukushima accident, the expected health effects from Fukushima (virtually zero from radiation, unmeasurable from ill conceived fear), and the need to improve public responses to rare, but still possible nuclear accidents. We commiserated a bit about the difficulty associated with changing people’s minds after they have already made choices about what they believe, and about the monetary incentives that encourage some people involved in related industries to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt about competitive energy sources.

I hope you enjoy our discussion. It’s been too long since the last Atomic Show, though I did share some audio extra files from the 2015 ANS meeting.


Atomic Insights is a for-profit venture pursuing a mission of gathering and spreading atomic energy understanding. We do not quantify or price the value of our product; we ask our readers and listeners to decide that for themselves. Donations are greatly appreciated, but they are not tax deductible.






Play

Doctors petitioning NRC to revise radiation protection regulations

The wheels are in motion for an official review of radiation protection regulations at the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Doctors who are radiation health specialists are challenging the NRC’s use of the linear, no-threshold (LNT) dose response model as the basis for those regulations and the associated direction to maintain radiation doses As Low As […]

Read more »

Musings from San Antonio, site of 2015 ANS meeting

This post brought to you by the generous readers who provided support for my travel and lodging in San Antonio. I hope you enjoy the resulting reports. My first observation is to note that Texans drive fast. The Texas segment of I-10 between the eastern border and San Antonio is the first road I’ve been […]

Read more »

Atomic Show #239 – Sarah Laskow and the LNT model

In March 2015, Foreign Policy magazine published an article by Sarah Laskow titled The Mushroom Cloud and The X-Ray Machine. The article described the controversy over the radiation protection model known as the linear, no-threshold dose response. Ms. Laskow conducted some admirable literature research and talked with a number of well-known people. The ones that […]

Read more »

Consumer Reports Editor Clings to LNT to Spread Uncertainty About Radiology

Consumer Reports, a widely read magazine in the U. S., has published more than half a dozen articles in the past couple of years warning people that every CT scan carries with it the risk of causing cancer. Here are the headlines of those articles. Consumer Reports: January 03, 2013. Many patients unaware of radiation […]

Read more »

Time to stop consuming precious resources to harmonize occupational dose limits

Pressure groups and interested individuals have been striving for more than two decades to force the U. S. to reduce its occupational worker radiation protection limit from 50 mSv/year to 20 mSv/year. The primary justification for this effort is that in 1991 the International Commission on Radiation Protection (ICRP) issued publication 60 and provided their […]

Read more »

Ethics of international radiation protection system

The U. S. National Council on Radiation Protection (NCRP) held its annual meeting in Bethesda, MD on March 16 and 17. On the second day of the meeting, Jacques Lochard, Vice Chair of the International Commission on Radiation Protection (ICRP), gave a talk titled The Ethics of Radiation Protection. The slides from that talk are […]

Read more »

Suppressing Differing Opinions to Promote “No Safe Dose” Mantra

Dr. Ed Calabrese has published additional installments in his continuing effort to illuminate the methods by which the 16 member Genetics Committee of the 1956 National Academy of Sciences Biological Effects of Atomic Radiation committee altered history. That small group of colleagues, chaired by the man who approved their research grant requests during the period […]

Read more »

Science has falsified the “no safe dose” hypothesis about radiation. Now what?

There is a growing understanding among people who specialize in understanding how ionizing radiation affects human beings that the prevailing “no safe dose” model that was adopted as the result of a major political struggle during the mid to late 1950s is false and does not represent reality. Responsible people that continue to accept and […]

Read more »

What We’re Told About Climate Change Versus What We’re Told About Genetic Effects of Radiation

The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) has started an initiative branded as “What We Know” about climate change. The initiative is sponsored by the following individuals and organizations: Grantham Foundation for the Protection of the Environment Lawrence H. Linden Robert Litterman The MacArthur Foundation Rockefeller Family Fund Henry M. Paulson Here is […]

Read more »

Health effects of nuclear radiation in plain language

CuttlerRadiationJan2013

By Jerry Cuttler, DSc, PEng All organisms have very remarkable protection capabilities. While most people still think that living cells are structurally stable, scientists discovered in the 1980s that cells undergo a very high rate of naturally-occurring physical and chemical damage caused by the heat, oxygen and other chemicals in their bodies. Approximately 10,000 measurable […]

Read more »

Presentations from NAS BEIR VIII Planning Meeting Posted

On November 17, 2014, I attended a meeting at the National Academy of Sciences building in Washington organized to determine if there is a need to convene an eighth committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR VIII). The presentations given during that meeting have been published on line at Planning Towards the BEIR […]

Read more »