A Quote by John Gofman

There is no safe dose of radiation since radiation is cumulative. Harm in the form of excess human cancer occurs at all doses of ionizing radiation, down to the lowest conceivable dose and dose rate.
Nuclear industry proponents often assert that low doses of radiation (eg below 100mSV) produce no ill effects and are therefore safe. But , as the US National Academy of Sciences BEIR VII report has concluded, no dose of radiation is safe, however small, including background radiation; exposure is cumulative and adds to an individual's risk of developing cancer.
Most medical physicists work in the physics of radiation oncology making sure that the desired dose is given to the cancer and the dose to normal tissues are minimized.
Ionizing radiation may well be the most important single cause of cancer, birth defects, and genetic disorders... The stakes for human health are very, very high in radiation matters. It is essential that people take no chance that conflict-of-interest is producing radiation databases which...cannot be trusted.
My main frustration is the fear of cancer from low dose radiation, even by radiologists.
There are allowable limits for radiation going - I mean there's radiation all around us. There's radiation from your television set. There's radiation from your computer. There's radiation actually occurring in the ground.
By any reasonable standard of proof, the combination of human epidemiology and track-analysis demonstrates that there is no threshold dose or dose-rate below which "repair" invariably prevents health harm.
When I entered the field in July 1958 I believed what they told me about radiation risks. I spent much effort reducing the dose to patients in radiology.
It's true that non-ionizing radiation lacks the power to have damage. But its damage seems to come from its modulated signal. So every 900 milliseconds, if you have a cellphone in your pocket, it's getting half of that radiation which is getting into you as it seeks the signal from the tower.
[From uranium] there are present at least two distinct types of radiation one that is very readily absorbed, which will be termed for convenience the ? radiation, and the other of a more penetrative character, which will be termed the ? radiation.
If one person sits down at their computer one day and types one word, dose that affect the future? If that one person didn't type that one word, would the future's history be changed? Dose their one word even mean anything? Dose my one (times a lot) word mean anything? Dose that one person's one word even get read-once? If I wasn't sitting here writing my words, would my future be different?
...there is no safe level of exposure to ionizing radiation, and the search for quantifying such a safe level is in vain.
Not smoking enough will cause lung cancer! If anybody is getting a cancerous activity in the lung, the probabilities are that it's radiation dosage coupled with the fact that he smokes. And what it does is start to run out the radiation dosage, don't you see.
Welcome to Perdido beach, where our motto is: Radiation, what radiation?
The Soviet State had never made radiation something that was publicized in any way, shape, or form. In fact, the Soviet Union had experienced a number of serious accidents involving radiation since the 1950s and had covered it up a number of times.
I had throat cancer, and I had to have radiation treatments, and I couldn't sing for a long time; and this was in '97. I had 28 radiation treatments. I didn't die, thank God.
Radiation doesn't recognize borders. A meltdown in Japan or India, say, is a danger to the whole world. Wind circulates the radiation everywhere. Water quality is affected. We all eat the same fish. We use products from all over the world - if something is contaminated, it will cause harm.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!