‘
.,
= ’q
paper by Professor Donald P. Geesaman:
So there is a hot particle problem with pluton-
:
»
ium in the lung, and the hot particle problem is not
understood, and there is no guidance as to the risk.
.
I don't think there is any controversy about that.
:
Let me quote to you from Dr. K.
Z. Morgan's testimony
in January of this year before the Joint Committee on
Atomic Enersy, U.S. Congress. [a] Dr. K. Z. Morgan
is one of the United States' two members to the main
Committee of the International Commission on Radiological Protection; he has been a member of the committee longer than anyone; and he is director of
Health Physics Division at Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
I quote:
“There are many things about radiation
exposure we do not understand, and there will continue
to be uncertainties until health physics can provide
‘
a coherent theory of radiation damage.
This is why
some of the basic research studies of the USAEC are so
important.
D. P. Geesaman and Tamplin have pointed
-Out recently the problems of plutonium-239 particles
and the uncertainty of the risk to a man who carries
such a particle of high specific activity in his lungs."
At the same hearing,
in response to the committee's
inquiry about priorities in basic research on the bio-
logical effects of radiation, Dr.
M.
Eisenbud,
then
* Director of the New York City Environmental Protection
Administration,
in part replied,
"For some reason or
other the particle problem has not come upon us in
quite a little while, but it probably will one of these
days.
We are not much further along on the basic
questionof whether a.given amount of energy delivered
to a progressively smaller and smaller volume of tissue
_is better or worse for the recipient.
This is another
wee -....,, Way of asking the questicn of how you calculate the dose ©
when you inhale a single particle."
.
[{b]
correct; the problem has come up again.
[a]
we
——
He was
Morgan, K. 2., “Radiation Standards for Reactor Sitinc,"
in Envireonmental Effects of Producing Electrical Power
Phase 2.
Testimony presented at Hearings pderore the Joint
‘—"Committee on Atomic Energy, 91st Congress, 1970.
Washington, D. C., y - S. Government Printing Office.
[b}
Eisenbud,
M.
Panel Discussion.
of Producing Electrical Power,
at Hearings pberore
In:
Environucentci
Phase 2.
Hi scets
TOSTINOny tro sonved
the Joint Conrithes on Atomic Ene
Waashington, BD. o., U. S. Gover:
9lst Congress, 1970.
Printing Office.
: