RADIATION STANDARDS, INCLUDING FALLOUT 7 today or tomorrow or sometime than I got by my 5 years of X-rays? That is what I wanted to deduce. I guess each person figures the same way. They have various types of X-rays made. I am wondering relatively whether it is a whole lot worse to be exposed to the fallout radiation from a series of tests than it is to go in and havea chest X-ray made every month for 5 years. Is there any way we can measure the relative hazard ? Dr. Wurrie. Yes. Senator Anperson. I won’t ask you to do it now. Will you give it to us sometime? Dr. Wurtz. I can answerin the case you have given. One chest X-ray a month for 5 years, it would seem to me by all estimates that I have heard of, would involve a great deal more exposure than we anticipate from fallout. There is one slight difference that you must recognize, and that is the chest X-rays you speak of involve exposure only to the chest, if it is properly done, and very little to the rest of the body. Whereas, with fallout, some of that material concentrates in one organ or another but it involves more nearly the whole body than does a chest X-ray. Senator Anperson. I appreciate that answer. I think it is helpful. All I am trying to find out for my ownsatisfaction is, since I got, say, 30 roentgens by this 5-year period, do I get enough in this next series of tests or in this series of tests so that I should go around with my head bowed down and worry about it, or can I continue to live as I have lived 45 years since my timein the hospital. Dr. Wurepte. I am not, sir, a prophet and prophecies are involved. My confident prediction is that the dose you will receive in the next few years from the fallout will be a very small fraction of what you received in that 5 years of medical examination. Senator Anperson. Since I left the University of Michigan to go out in that part of the world, I appreciate that answer. Chairman Hotirrecp. I would like to carry that down little bit further. We talked about 5 years once a month. Thatis 60 exposures of, I believe, you said five-tenths of a roentgen each. That would be 30 roentgens exposure. What is the estimated increase in the background radiation due to testing annually ? Dr. Wutepte. I am sure you are going to have witnesses before you that are better qualified to estimate the future conditionsof fallout. Chairman Hotrrtenp. I am talking about the increase annually in background radiation caused by testing over normal radiation—the average increase—from tests held to date. Dr. Wurertz. From tests held to-date? Chairman Hotrrrexp. Yes. Dr. Wuierte. Accordingto every estimate that I have seen and our own work the increase is a few percent of the present natural background. In other words, if you take as a national average, as I have ™mmy statement, one-tenth of a rem per year from natural sources of radiation, most of the data taken on a nationwide basis that I know of indicate that there may be a few hundredths of a rem per year as result from fallout. Chairman Hourrtetp. In other words, it is generally conceded that. normal backgroundradiation to which mostpeople are exposed would amount to about 7 roentgens in a 70-year lifetime, is that right? sieyhceheRRRSHGURBSHitecthayseaombintete