The 8 guidelines

During a workshop weekend at the German resort of Detmold, the German Society for Radiation Protection formulated new guidelines for radiation protection.

Abstract of explanation

The requirement to minimise radiation exposure should be adjusted exclusively to the health risk and the obligation to take protection measures according to state-of-the-art science and technology. Internal and economic factors should not play a significant role. Violations of the minimising requirement should be regarded as contrary to the regulations and made a punishable offence. (see attitude I, attitude II)

Recent scientific findings about risk factors for detrimental radiation effects should within 2 to 3 years be mandated to be reflected in updates in the radiation protection regulations. (see attitude III, attitude IV)

The procedure for selecting consultants to radiation commissions by the responsible ministry has to be changed. The present procedure leads to domination by the interests of the nuclear industry. To assure a broader spectrum of evaluation of the current state of knowledge and a representation of the interests of affected populations, independent experts should be appointed upon nomination by environmental groups and the unions. (see attitude I, attitude II,  attitude IX)

With a continuing trend of increasing risks per unit dose found in more recent epidemiological studies of populations exposed to low doses of ionizing radiation, the originally intended level of protection for workers and the public was not maintained by unrevised dose limits. This applies to exposure limits for the public at large and to occupational standards. However, when adjustments to standards are made, they should not only be based on the revised analyses from the Hiroshima and Nagasaki life-span study, but also on consistent patterns of findings of increased health detriment among populations exposed to low levels of radioactive fallout from the Chernobyl explosion and from weapons tests. The old equivalent dose concept needs to be replaced by a new concept which will differentiate between various kinds of exposure conditions. Current radiation standards have grossly underestimated the potential genetic consequences of radiation exposure, and have completely neglected observed teratogenic and non-carcinogenic consequences. (see attitude V, attitude IV)

This recommendation results from the fact that for stochastic detriment the collective dose is an appropriate and tested measure for the expected number of excess cases of disease (morbidity) and deaths (mortality) in an exposed population. A strict limitation of the collective dose must be introduced into the radiation protection regulations. (see attitude VIII)

Besides radon exposure in buildings, medical diagnostic radiation exposure is the main contributor to the radiation load of the average German citizen. Other European countries like England and Belgium show that the collective dose thus produced can be reduced by almost half without a loss of diagnostic quality. (see attitude IV, attitude VI)

Cosmic radiation levels and their inherent contribution of neutrons lead to substantial radiation exposure of flight personnel, especially during intercontinental flights. That exposure is on average 2 to 4 times higher than that for workers at nuclear power plants. (see attitude V, attitude VI, attitude VII)

A control of radon exposure in buildings, at health resorts and in underground installations and of exposure during long-haul flights has to be introduced . In addition, the radioactivity content of mineral water and drinking water has to be declared and an upper limit has to be established. (see attitude VII)

Attitudes towards Radiation Protection

The present radiation protection regulations are inconsistent with the present state of knowledge concerning health consequences of ionizing radiation. Therefore, they do not provide the required protection, either for nuclear workers or the population at large. A reduction of dose limits is urgently required. Moreover, a restriction of the collective dose, i. e. the total radiation load resulting from a nuclear plant or a special measure, has to be introduced. It is the collective dose which indicates the number of victims among an affected population. The aim of any radiation protection law must in the first place be the protection of life and health. Protection of public health should not be compromised by a contravening standard of keeping the costs of operation of nuclear plants at an "affordable" level. No such standard has ever been applied to military expenses.

Index

6th August 1998

Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Köhnlein, Münster, FRG

President of the German Society for Radiation Protection

(Gesellschaft für Strahlenschutz e.V.)