Article Abstract:
In December 1989, the National Academy of Sciences produced a report that examined the dangers of low-level radiation. It was concluded that the risk of developing cancer after being exposed to a low dose of radiation is three to four times higher than was estimated ten years earlier. The National Academy of Sciences fifth committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR V) specifically examined the effects of radiation from X-rays, neutrons, and gamma rays, which are found in medical diagnostic machines and the nuclear industry. The 1989 estimation of risk of cancer due to low-level radiation exposure was more specific than that in 1979 because there was improvement in three sources of measurement. First, ten years had passed providing another decade of data for assessing the death rate among survivors of the Nagasaki and Hiroshima atom bomb attacks of 1945. Second, calculation of the radiation released from the two bombs improved, and third, a more sophisticated computer model of risk was developed. One finding was that gamma radiation was responsible for most of the ill health effects, and the development of solid tumors was directly related to the dose of radiation. BEIR V estimated that in a population of 100,000 people exposed to 10 rem of radiation, 800 people would die of radiation-induced cancer. The various scientific disagreements regarding computer modeling of risk factors are described.
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Article Abstract:
A review panel called for radical changes in US policy on ethical, legal and social issues (ELSI) of the Human Genome Project. They recommended a new Health and Human Services Dept policy board and two committees to evaluate research on ELSI issues in human genetics.
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Article Abstract:
The 1996 National Research Council report on DNA fingerprinting is more favorable to prosecutors than its controversial 1992 report. However, critics of DNA forensics are shifting their focus to possible laboratory error.
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic: