Is There a Reliable Link Between Gamma Radiation and Childhood Leukemia?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the potential link between gamma radiation (GR) and childhood leukemia, exploring the levels of gamma radiation exposure from background sources and examining existing studies that may support or refute this connection. The scope includes theoretical considerations, references to studies, and the implications of radiation exposure on health.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks specific data on gamma radiation exposure from background radiation, noting difficulty in finding this information separately from total background radiation.
  • Another participant references a 2007 article from Oxford University that links gamma radiation to childhood leukemia, suggesting it as a resource for further investigation.
  • A participant cites the World Nuclear Association, stating that average early exposure to background gamma radiation is around 600 μSv, with a range of 100-1000 μSv per person.
  • There is a repeated mention of the World Nuclear Association's data on gamma radiation exposure, indicating its significance in the discussion.
  • A later reply challenges the reliability of the link between gamma radiation and childhood leukemia, suggesting that the relative risk increase could range from 3% to 22% per millisievert, and emphasizes the complexity of isolating gamma radiation's effects from other potential cancer causes.
  • This participant also expresses skepticism about the study's ability to demonstrate a reliable link, indicating that significant effects could arise by chance due to the variety of cancer types and radiation studied.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the reliability of the link between gamma radiation and childhood leukemia. While some reference studies that suggest a connection, others argue against the validity of these findings, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the assumptions made about the studies referenced, the definitions of terms like "significant effect," and the lack of direct links to scientific papers supporting claims made about gamma radiation and cancer risk.

UiOStud
Messages
9
Reaction score
2
I'm trying to find out how much gamma-radiation the average human is exposed too from background radiation. But all I can find are numbers describing the total background radiation, not just the gamma radiation alone. Does anyone know where I can find this information?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Oxford University had an article in 2007 linking GR and childhood leukemia. Perhaps the professors in the article would be a good lead for you.

http://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2012-06-12-gamma-rays-background-radiation-linked-childhood-leukaemia

I hope this helps.
Deneen2000
gamma.jpg
 

Attachments

  • gamma.jpg
    gamma.jpg
    17.8 KB · Views: 627
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: UiOStud
World nuclear association published that early exposure background gamma radiation is averaged at 600 μSv, with a range of 100-1000 μSv per person. See the chart in this link.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: UiOStud and mfb
Fervent Freyja said:
World nuclear association published that early exposure background gamma radiation is averaged at 600 μSv, with a range of 100-1000 μSv per person. See the chart in this link.
Thank you!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Fervent Freyja
Deneen2000 said:
Oxford University had an article in 2007 linking GR and childhood leukemia.
Forget that study.
Study said:
The relative risk increase is likely to lie within a range from 3% to 22% per millisievert.
In other words, zero is still possible. Given the large number of possible cancer types, possible population groups, and types of radiation you can study (and they did look at other cancer types and other types of radiation), it would be surprising if you cannot find any "significant" effect by chance. And even if it would be highly significant (it is not), it still doesn't allow separating the effect of gamma radiation and other possible causes of cancer.
They don't link to a scientific paper, but simply based on the article, the study does not demonstrate a reliable link between anything.
 

Similar threads

High School Gamma rays over very large areas
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Gamma Radiation and Electrolysis
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
706
Graduate Can any thin materials protect a Mars spacecraft from gamma rays?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
High School Which one is more efficient in generating high energy Gamma rays?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
High School Induced Radiation: Marie Curie's Notes & Effects of Gamma/X-Rays
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Undergrad Gamma radiation, photon energies and wavelength question
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Can Geiger Counter Ticks be converted into particle/wave counts?
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Undergrad How long can you be exposed to gamma radiation for
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Graduate Can GM gamma meter be sensitive for neutron radiation?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Graduate Larger X-ray dose in traditional X-ray of head vs. Head CT?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K