Individual radiation protection: idea and research needs

Abstract

The current Radiation Protection System is based on the definition and use of the effective dose, a complex quantity which is not measurable and normally not easily understood by the general public.
 National radiation protection requirements and regulations stem from a few basic principles, one of which is the respect of individual annual limits, specified in terms of the quantities effective dose and equivalent dose. Another guiding principle is the continuous quest for of individual integrated doses, i.e. trying to keep radiation exposures low, assuming that any exposure to radiation is an increase of radiological risk to the exposed individual.
 Despite the general robustness of the Radiation Protection System, which derives from more than a century of research and experience in the various uses of radiation, some of the fundamental assumptions upon which the Radiation Protection System is built also constitute the source of its present weaknesses. 
 The paper discusses three such weaknesses (the disconnect between design doses and actual doses; the use of the quantity effective dose as a proxy for radiological risks; and the use of the Linear, No Threshold hypothesis and of the optimization principle), and proposes research that could lead to the development of a new Individual Radiation Protection System framework that (i) implements a scientifically sound correlation between exposure to ionizing radiation and health risks, (ii) leverages recent advances in computational modeling and genomic sciences, and (iii) has the potential to lessen the costs and regulatory burden for radiation workers in all fields.