Author/Authors :
Eslami, J School of Midwifery and Nursing - Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran , Mortazavi, S. M. J Ionizing and Non-ionizing Radiation Protection Research Center (INIRPRC) - Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran , Mortazavi, S. A. R School of Medicine - Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
Abstract :
There is no place on the Earth, the planet we live on, where the natural background
radiation level is zero. Since the birth and even in our fetal stage, we have been
exposed to different sources of natural radiation. Life, in fact, evolved in a radiation
environment that was much more harsh than today. Earth serves as a source of terrestrial
radiation. Uranium, thorium, and radium are among the radioactive materials
that naturally exist in soil and rock. Moreover, the air, we breathe, contains radon, a
colorless, odorless, radioactive gas that is created naturally by the radioactive decay
of uranium and radium. The crucial importance of the studies on the health effects
of living in areas with high levels of background radiation for understanding the
biological impact of exposure to low doses of ionizing radiation is well documented.
Despite the undeniable need for accurate information about the health effects of
exposure to high levels of background radiation, many published papers suffer from
methodological and other common types of errors. In this paper, we review three
articles published on high background radiation areas. The first paper has addressed
the frequencies of unstable (dicentrics& rings), stable (translocations & inversions),
and other types of chromosome aberration in adult men from both high background
radiation areas of Kerala and areas with normal background radiation. The second
paper has addressed different aspects of the world’s high background natural radiation
areas. Finally, the third paper has tried to address the role of background radiation
on males to females’ ratio at birth. The author has mainly referred to the studies
performed on the impact of radiation exposures from nuclear testing (worldwide)
and Chernobyl fallout (in Europe).The major shortcomings of these three papers,
especially methodological errors, which affected the accuracy of their findings and
conclusions are discussed.
