NCRP Report No. 160: Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States

Abstract

This report by Committee 6 of the Council is an extensive update of a previous report on the exposure of the US population to ionizing radiation sources from data gathered in the 1980s (published as Report 93 in 1987). It is combined with an update on the more in-depth assessment of data on medical exposures previously reported in 1989 (Report 100). Individual chapters in this new report are dedicated to specific sources of exposure to the US population—both from natural and artificial radiation—and the level of detail in each chapter is intended to reflect the significance of the contribution of each source to the total collective dose of the population.The first chapter is on the most significant contributor: background radiation. It expands on the concept of natural background radiation in Report 93, renaming it 'ubiquitous background', and describing in detail the contributions from both extra-terrestrial and terrestrial sources. The data demonstrates that the average dose from such exposure has varied little since the previous report (a slight increase from 3.0 mSv to 3.1 mSv).The next chapter is on medical radiation, i.e. the exposure to the population when attending as patients, not including occupational exposure to hospital workers. The most striking data published in the entire report is the increase in the contribution to the total US population dose attributed to such medical exposures. It is now as significant as that from background radiation: medical exposures now account for an average effective dose to the US citizen of 3.00 mSv, up from 0.53 mSv in 1992 (Report 100).The most important contribution to this increase is the 1.46 mSv from CT scanning alone. The nuclear medicine (including PET) contribution is up from 0.14 mSv to 0.77mSv. This evidently must be due to significant changes in medical radiological practice in the US tied to the increase in the availability of CT and PET imaging facilities. These increasing contributions have driven the overall average effective dose to a US citizen from approximately 3.6 mSv reported in 1987 to 6.2 mSv per annum, with medical exposures now responsible for 48% of the total (up from 15% in 1992). It is interesting to note that over roughly the same period of time, the total dose to the UK population has been revised upwards from 2.6 mSv to 2.7mSv to reflect (amongst other factors) the increase in CT scanning in the UK—obviously a much smaller change. However, one has to consider whether medical radiological practices in the UK might similarly change in the coming years, and UK population doses subsequently follow the US trend reported here.There is now a more detailed chapter on exposure to the population from consumer products and activities. Of the contributing factors in this category, the radiation dose received from radioactivity in tobacco smoke is the most significant, followed by building materials and air travel. There has been no significant change in the total dose received from these sources when compared to the earlier Report 93, at 0.13 mSv.The report also gives significant detail on exposure to the public from industrial sources (not just nuclear power), and discusses occupational exposure. Both these categories of exposure, averaged out of the whole population, give very small contributions to the total dose (0.003 mSv and 0.005 mSv, respectively).There are two final points to make about this report. Firstly, it continues the NCRP policy introduced for Report 93 of using SI units rather than the radiation units more commonly used within the US, hence making this report more readily accessible to an international audience. Secondly, in all the descriptions of the exposures and radiation doses received, no attempt is made to convert the doses into risk. The view of the Council, as stated in the forward to the report, is that attempting to quantify the risks associated with such levels of radiation exposure falls outside the remit of the Committee that prepared the report.