Radiation: Unseen, Growing, but

Most Worry is Focused on the

Wrong Thing
PM 529
Week Ten, Apr 1, 2015

Radiation Exposures of Concern

Radon from basement soils
X-rays from medical tests
Solar ultraviolet radiation
Any more?

Scott Fruin
Preventive Medicine

Radiation: Propagation of Energy

through Space
Can be waves or particles
Unlike other pollutants, exposure can occur without
physical contact with source
Key health consideration is whether enough energy
to dislodge electrons (ionize) molecules.
If yes, ionizing radiation can damage DNA
If no, non-ionizing typically only causes thermal effects

(Electromagnetic fields are not radiation! No direct

transfer of energy)

Electromagnetic Spectrum

Ionizing vs Non-ionizing Radiation

Ionizing: high energy (high frequency, short
wave length)
X-ray, gamma ray, alpha or beta particles

Non-ionizing: lower energy

Microwaves, radiowaves

Ultraviolet (UV) is on the threshold

Ionizing fraction ionizes air and is mostly blocked by
atmosphere and ozone layer (UVC)
Transmitted fraction is relatively high energy and
capable of skin damage though not ionizing

Another View of
the
Electromagnetic
Spectrum
from NIH, 2002, EMF

IONIZING

Assessing (Ionizing) Radiation

Risk
Assumption is a linear dose-response with no
threshold,
Since DNA does undergo repair, this assumption is
probably conservative, but at low doses, cancer risk
increases are very difficult to ascertain against a
background cancer rate of ~40%

Naturally Occurring Ionizing Radiation:

Radioactive Decay of Less Stable Isotopes
Isotopes have same
number of protons and
electrons, so similar
chemical properties, but
different masses

Number of
neutrons

Stable nucleus depends

on fairly precise p:n ratio,
small surplus of neutrons
Deviation from stable ratio
strongly affects decay rate
Short half-life (y axis on
right) indicates lower stability
(time for half of atoms to
decay)

Units of Radiation
Three types:

Number of protons

Units of Measurement:
Decay Rate
How many atoms decay per unit time

Decays per time (for radioactive decay)

Energy per unit area
Biologically effective dose (takes tissue differences into
account)

Becquerel (Bq) is one decay per second

Older unit, the Curie (Ci) is based on gram of
radium, 3.7 x 1010 Bq
Radon action level: 4 pCi/liter (4x10-9 Ci/L), ~150
Bq/m3 or 150 decays per second per m3quite
a bit of activity!

Decay Product Differences

Alpha decay: two protons and two
neutrons (basically a high velocity
He ion) from heavier elements
Low penetration into matter due to high
charge to mass ratio (e.g., stopped by
skin or even a few cm of air)
When ingested, destructive due to high
energy (e.g., radon breakdown in
lungs)

Units of Measurement:
Absorbed Dose of Energy
Measure of energy transfer per amount of
tissue impacted
Gray (Gy)
1 joule of energy deposited in 1 kilogram of mass.

Rad "radiation absorbed dose"

1 Gy = 100 rad

Beta decay: high speed electron,

medium penetration ability
Any surplus energy can form
gamma waves (high E photon)

Risk also Depends on Receiving

Tissue
Biggest concern is damage to DNA; unrepaired
DNA is a mutation.
Rapidly-developing or dividing cells more prone to
permanent damage
Less time to repair damaged DNA before replication
Time in womb especially sensitive during organogenesis,
followed by times of rapid growth in childhood and
adolescence

Units of Measurement:
Biologically-Effective Dose
Measured in Sieverts
(Sv),
Neutron, proton and alpha
radiation cause 5-20 times
more damage (Q Factor)
than the same amount of
the absorbed dose of beta
or gamma radiation.
(Particles are more
effective at producing
damage than waves due to
smaller area of impact)

Biological Effectiveness
Factor by Radiation Type
Type of Radiation

Q Factor

Alpha particles

20

Beta particles

Gamma radiation

Protons, fast neutrons

10

Slow (thermal) neutrons

Population Exposure to Ionizing Radiation

Population Radiation Doses

US general population
3-4 mSv every year whole body equivalent dose
(higher now?)
Avg contribution:

(Nat Council on Radiation Protection)

Focus of
exposure
reduction
should be:
1. Radon
2. Medical
3. UV
4. All
others

Radon 2.0 mSv

Cosmic radiation 0.3 mSv
Internal (food or water ingestion) 0.4 mSv
X-rays 0.4 mSv

Cigarettes ~15 mSv per year!

CAT scan ~50 mSv

Sources of Exposure

Growth in Ionizing Medical

Radiation Exposure, 1980 to 2006
(Mettler et al., 2009, Radiology)

Most ionizing exposure is naturally-occurring

Radon accounts for ~half of population exposure
Cosmic radiation significant (gamma radiation
[photons]; most absorbed by atmosphere, so higher
at higher altitudes)

1980

2006

Most man-made ionizing exposure is medical

and increasingly unnecessary (e.g, CAT scans)

Medical Procedures: A Growing

Concern
X-rays equal to 2-3 days of natural background
CAT scans
Hundreds of times higher dose; multiple years of
background exposure
Over-use from efforts to recoup high machine costs

Radon: 55% of Population

Exposure to Ionizing Radiation
Leading cause of lung cancer for nonsmokers
Source is naturally-occurring
radon gas from soil as a 238U
break-down product (radium).
Radium gives off an alpha
particle, turns to radon gas
Radon itself has little effect, but
produces a short-lived particle
that lodges in lungs and
produces alpha decay

Radon and Cancer Risk

Radon: Prevention

Health effects: large increases in lung cancer risk

for both smokers and non-smokers

Source is high uranium content soil. Varies by region

(next slide), but estd 1 of 15 homes above action
level (next slide)
Recommended action level 4 pCi/L

2% of Europes cancer deaths; strong interaction with

smoking (Darby et al., 2004)
12% of US lung cancer deaths, 15,000 22,000

Outdoor levels 0.4

Testing is cheap, easy and accurate

Especially important for anyone with a basement or
anyone living in area of high soil U

Mitigation
Can reduce radon by re-routing air in contact with soils to
prevent entering home (vents and fans), along with sealing
basement cracks and/or increasing home ventilation

Radon by County (Avg Only)

U in Soils

Yellow < 2 pCi/L; Red > 4, the action level

Radon: CA

Cosmic Radiation: 8-24%

West LA County is red,

Eastern LA County is
orange

Earth protected from cosmic particles by magnetic

field, atmosphere

My house (Pasadena):
1.3 pCi / L, the avg
indoor level

At jet altitudes can be up to two orders of

magnitude higher ; airline crew guidelines are 20
mSv per year, while most people on ground get 2-4
mSv per year

~ Two-fold increase from sea level to mountains

Can vary strongly with solar activity

Radiation Protection
Shielding depends on type of radiation
Distancewave intensity or emitted
particles per area fall off with cube of
distance
Timelonger time allows cellular
damage repair

UV Radiation: Three Types

UVA
320-400 nm. It passes through the Earth's
ozone layer. Can cause early aging of the
skin.

UV Radiation: Non-ionizing, but

Still a Skin Cancer Concern
Strongly varies by latitude, season, time of day
Risk also varies by skin pigment
Some UV essential for vitamin D production, esp. at
extreme latitudes

Inverse relationship between UVR and

latitude

UVB
280-320nm. The ozone layer absorbs most
of the sun's UVB. It does not go as deeply
into the skin as UVA does, but can cause
sunburn. Large doses increase risk of skin
cancer and possibly cataracts.
UVC
< 280 nm. Is completely absorbed by the
Earth's ozone layer. Implications for the
ozone hole

Seasonal Differences:
LA max UV Index
from www.city-data.com

Radiation Exposure Assessment

Naturally occurring:
Radon: home concentrations work well, but can vary by
floor or room due to differences in air exchange rates
Can use regional surrogates if not measured

Water: also from radon (slightly soluble in water);

Cosmic radiation: varies primarily with altitude
UV: very behavior dependent (time outdoors, time of day).

Man-made
Medical procedures: can be tabulated; may be dominated
by CAT scans or other radiographic procedures
Smoking an important source of exposure

Workplace: radiation badges (miners, flight crews,

etc)

Non-Ionizing Radiation
Not enough E to break chemical bonds, but
can be enough energy to excite molecules
(heat), cause burns, etc.
Overall, some evidence (but inconclusive) of
possible effects on immune system,
developmental disturbances, neurobehavioral
abnormalities, cell proliferation
Inter-individual sensitivities may show large range
Exposures increasing over time and effects may
take decades to show up

Microwaves, Radiowaves
Long waves, 0.1 mm to football field; 3 kHz
to 300 GHz (7 orders of magnitude)
Includes cell phones, other
telecommunications
Large studies to date are inconclusive, likely a
combination of small effect and exposure
assessment error

Exposures increasing in recent decades;

probably worthy of no-regrets avoidance
How fast do you have to run to escape a lion?

A Larger Concern:
Extremely Low Frequency (ELF)
Magnetic Fields
Frequencies below 300 Hz, often 60 Hz
Almost all exposure is man-made

Technically not radiation since energy is not

being propagated
Induction of small electrical currents in the
conductive parts of the body: cell membranes,
nerves, retina, etc.
Some evidence for increased risk of childhood
leukemia; also, effects on ion transport, melatonin
secretion, and tumor promotion

ELF EMFs: Health Effects

Most prominent health risk is childhood
leukemia above 4 mG
Magnetic fields implicated, not electrical
One worry is recall bias in case control studies

Animal and occupational studies inconclusive

Static fields do not appear to be of concern at

typical levels

Magnetic vs Electrical Fields

SOURCE

Magnetic Fields

Electrical Fields

Flowing current

High voltage

HEALTH EFFECTS Possible

increased risk of
childhood
leukemia
SHIELDING
DIFFICULT:
Expensive metal
alloys

Little evidence

EASY: Any
conductive
shields or frame

Avoid MRIs?
Field strengths are very high
The combination of high static, gradient, and ELF
MF and high RF fields have been virtually
unstudied; each separately has detectable but small
biological effects
Yes, unless medically necessary

Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRIs)

First medical use 1980
MRI typically 20 min @ 1.5 T (15 x 106 mG)
Combination of strong static, gradient, and 1001000Hz magnetic fields as well as RF fields of 10400 MHz.
High static and gradient fields show many biological
effects but conclusions uncertain
Almost no research on the combined exposure

Some evidence for chromosome damage

(increased micronuclei) from MRI magnetic fields,
though reversed within 48 hours (Simi, S. et al., Mutat. Res.
Fundam. Mol. Mech. Mutagen. 2008 )

Conclusions
Few environmental risks show the range of energy /
toxicity / uncertainty as radiation (>1010)
Worry should be concerned with energy level, but usually
is not
Most envl exposures of concern are decreasing; this not
the case for radiation and EMF
Medical exposure to ionizing radiation is an important PH
problem

ELF EMF possibly a cause for concern

The good news: most of ionizing radiation exposure

is avoidable:
E.g., radon, unnecessary medical X-rays, UV, etc.