BIODOSIMETRY AND BIODOSIMETRY NETWORKS FOR MANAGING RADIATION EMERGENCY.

Biological dosimetry enables individual dose reconstruction in the case of unclear or inconsistent radiation exposure situations, especially when a direct measurement of ionizing radiation is not or is no longer possible. To be prepared for large-scale radiological incidents, networking between well-trained laboratories has been identified as a useful approach for provision of the fast and trustworthy dose assessments needed in such circumstances. To this end, various biodosimetry laboratories worldwide have joined forces and set up regional and/or nationwide networks either on a formal or informal basis. Many of these laboratories are also a part of global networks such as those organized by World Health Organization, International Atomic Energy Agency or Global Health Security Initiative. In the present report, biodosimetry networks from different parts of the world are presented, and the partners, activities and cooperation actions are detailed. Moreover, guidance for situational application of tools used for individual dosimetry is given.

NON-RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT OF A NUCLEAR EMERGENCY: PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE WITH THE FOCUS ON HEALTH.

Available experience from Chernobyl and Fukushima clearly demonstrate that nuclear emergencies may result in low and very low exposure levels, at which psychological and social effects among the affected population will dominate over the actual biological effects of ionising radiation. International protection standards and guidelines request, that both radiological and non-radiological health consequences have to be considered in preparedness and response to an actual emergency and there is a need to broaden the radiation protection system's philosophy beyond the metrics of radioactivity and radiation dose. During the past decade a number of multidisciplinary projects were set up with the aim of evaluating management options according to social, economic and ethical criteria, in addition to technical feasibility to achieve this goal. WHO and partners from the Inter-Agency Standing Committee Task Force on Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in Emergency Settings have developed a comprehensive framework and guidelines, which can be applied to any type of an emergency or disaster regardless of its origin. There is a need to include the available scientific expertise and the technical, managerial and personal resources to be considered within a similar 'decision framework' that will apply to radiation emergencies. Key areas of the required expertise needed to develop such a framework are radiation protection, medical support (especially primary care and emergency medicine, mental health support), social sciences (anthropology, psychology, ethics) and communications experts. The implementation of such a multidisciplinary concept in the operational world requires education and training well beyond the level currently available.

Protecting Public Health in Nuclear Emergencies-the Need to Broaden the Process.

It is necessary for the radiation protection system to broaden beyond radioactive dose, the view on impact of nuclear accidents, taking in consideration the psychological, social and economic determinants impacting the vulnerability of the exposed population, as well as the impacts of emergency countermeasures. It is strongly recommended to pursue strategies, approaches and services that will address these aspects within the general health protection system and will be applied before, during and after an emergency. The paper raises awareness and proposes a three-step development process for an integrated framework based on the social determinants of health approach.

Using the Grade Approach to Support the Development of Recommendations for Public Health Interventions in Radiation Emergencies.

The World Health Organization (WHO) guideline development policy requires that WHO guidelines be developed in a manner that is transparent and based on all available evidences, which must be synthesised and formally assessed for quality. To fulfil this requirement, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach of rating quality of evidence and grading strength of recommendations was applied when developing the WHO recommendations on public health interventions in radiation emergencies. The guideline development group (GDG) formulated 10 PICO (P: population; I: intervention; C: comparator; O: outcomes) questions to guide the development of recommendations on response interventions during the early/intermediate and late emergency phases and on risk communications for mitigating psycho-social impact of radiation emergencies. For each PICO question, an extensive evidence search and systematic review was conducted. The GDG then formulated the recommendations using the evidence to recommendation (E-2-R) decision-making matrix and evaluated the strength of each recommendation.

ICRP Publication 111 - Application of the Commission's recommendations to the protection of people living in long-term contaminated areas after a nuclear accident or a radiation emergency.

In this report, the Commission provides guidance for the protection of people living in long-term contaminated areas resulting from either a nuclear accident or a radiation emergency. The report considers the effects of such events on the affected population. This includes the pathways of human exposure, the types of exposed populations, and the characteristics of exposures. Although the focus is on radiation protection considerations, the report also recognises the complexity of post-accident situations, which cannot be managed without addressing all the affected domains of daily life, i.e. environmental, health, economic, social, psychological, cultural, ethical, political, etc. The report explains how the 2007 Recommendations apply to this type of existing exposure situation, including consideration of the justification and optimisation of protection strategies, and the introduction and application of a reference level to drive the optimisation process. The report also considers practical aspects of the implementation of protection strategies, both by authorities and the affected population. It emphasises the effectiveness of directly involving the affected population and local professionals in the management of the situation, and the responsibility of authorities at both national and local levels to create the conditions and provide the means favouring the involvement and empowerment of the population. The role of radiation monitoring, health surveillance, and the management of contaminated foodstuffs and other commodities is described in this perspective. The Annex summarises past experience of longterm contaminated areas resulting from radiation emergencies and nuclear accidents, including radiological criteria followed in carrying out remediation measures.

Ultrasound-detected thyroid nodule prevalence and radiation dose from fallout.

Settlements near the Semipalatinsk Test Site (SNTS) in northeastern Kazakhstan were exposed to radioactive fallout during 1949-1962. Thyroid disease prevalence among 2994 residents of eight villages was ascertained by ultrasound screening. Malignancy was determined by cytopathology. Individual thyroid doses from external and internal radiation sources were reconstructed from fallout deposition patterns, residential histories and diet, including childhood milk consumption. Point estimates of individual external and internal dose averaged 0.04 Gy (range 0-0.65) and 0.31 Gy (0-9.6), respectively, with a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.46. Ultrasound-detected thyroid nodule prevalence was 18% and 39% among males and females, respectively. It was significantly and independently associated with both external and internal dose, the main study finding. The estimated relative biological effectiveness of internal compared to external radiation dose was 0.33, with 95% confidence bounds of 0.09-3.11. Prevalence of papillary cancer was 0.9% and was not significantly associated with radiation dose. In terms of excess relative risk per unit dose, our dose-response findings for nodule prevalence are comparable to those from populations exposed to medical X rays and to acute radiation from the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombings.