SREL Reprint #2682

Environmental Radiation Effects: A Need to Question Old Paradigms And To Enhance Collaboration Between Radiation Biologists And Radiation Ecologists

T. G. Hinton1 and F. Ward Whicker2

1University of Georgia, Savannah River Ecology Laboratory, Aiken, SC, USA
2Department of Health Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA

INTRODUCTION:
The radiological sciences are a real enigma- the maturity and depth of understanding concerning human dosimetry contrasts sharply with our shallow understanding about radiological effects to biota. The richness of the radiological sciences is apparent by looking at the refinements made to the fundamental unit used in human dosimetry. Dose, energy absorbed kg-1 tissue, has been developed to where it now accounts for the relative biological effectiveness of different types of radiation, the distribution of the radionuclide within the body, and the future lifetime body burden of the contaminant, having taken in to account the biological halftime of the radionuclide. The radiological sciences have developed to where probabilistic risk factors can now be applied that predict specific deleterious effects to humans per unit dose. This maturity far exceeds that of the non-radiological sciences and their methods for determining dose to humans from other types of pollutants!
And yet, these same radiological sciences that have made such advances in human dosimetry, are primitive when effects to biota are concerned. There are no specialized units, no agreed upon weighting factors, no factors that account for distributions within an organism's body, and certainly no risk factors. There are no internationally agreed upon criteria or policies that explicitly address protection of the environment from ionizing radiation, although many international agreements and statues call for protection against pollution [1]. There is not even agreement as to what endpoint should be measured to quantify an environmental effect (Fig. 1)!
Historically, the low priority in funding environmental effects research is partially due to the long-standing paradigm for protecting the environment from radiation: If man is adequately protected then so is the environment. Explicit radiological limits are not needed for the biota if dose limits are set to protect humans then the environment is automatically protected as well [2, 3, 4]. Such an anthropocentric view has been deemed totally unacceptable for other contaminants! Why has it persisted within the radiological sciences? The apparent dichotomy in rigor by which we protect humans versus the environment is understandable if the history behind the paradigm is explored. That, in part, is the topic of this paper. Additionally, we provide a brief overview of radiation effects to the environment, and summarize recent international questioning of the paradigm by highlighting three different approaches to the problem. We also suggest topics that need to be researched, and in conclusion emphasize that if the environmental radiation problems are going to be properly addressed, an enhanced collaboration is required between what has traditionally been separated disciplines of radiation biology and radiation ecology.

SREL Reprint #2682

Hinton, T. G. and F. W. Whicker. 2002. Environmental radiation effects: a need to question old paradigms and to enhance collaboration between radiation biologists and radiation ecologists. p. 1-7 In: K. Tanaka et. al. (Eds.). Biological Effects of Low Dose Radiation: Molecular Mechanisms for Radiation-induced Cellular Response and Cancer Development, Bunka-Kouryu Plaza, Rokkasho, Aomori, October 9-11. Institute for Environmental Sciences, Japan.

This information was provided by the University of Georgia's Savannah River Ecology Laboratory (srel.uga.edu).