Living With Environmental Risks from Nature Healthcare

HEALTHCARE

Healthcare: Living With Environmental Risks from Nature

Radiation is a type of energy that moves with waves or particles, the most common type is ionizing radiation, which is extremely harmful (Funk et al., 2016). Radiation exposure has definite insinuations that will be discussed in this paper with mitigation strategies. Moreover, scientific, technology and societal issues are also elucidated for a thorough understanding.

Scientific Issues Regarding Radiation Environmental Risk

Constant scientific research investigates possible risks and their severity for catalyzing risk perception (Kim, 2016). Media is key in shaping people’s perceptions and health hazards from scientific experiments. The involvement of radiation technology and its stigmatizations negatively influence people’s health. Unless the alleviated risk perception becomes conducive to scientific research, exacerbating the risks could be catered to (Kim, 2016).

The social stigmatization of nuclear experiments goes a long way toward causing a discrepancy between the opinions of the experts and that of laymen (Kim, 2016). It involves the accuracy of the opinions that should be corroborated by evidence and both sides of the arguments that state ‘for’ and ‘against’ for the view. Health communication done by the media might not be the right way as they worsen the impact that the human body experiences due to radiation exposure; again, the public consensus remains the same since the human phenomenon displays its consequences adding to the public’s anxiety (Kim, 2016).

Scientific institutes like the Departments of Defense and Health and Human Services are expediting their efforts towards such research work, which would inculcate increasing the danger of survival, decreasing life perils and resulting morbidity, and risk reduction due to ionizing radiation (IR) (Rosen et al., 2015).

Technological Issues Regarding Radiation Environmental Risk

Radiation biodosimetry technologies are commonly used to detect biological hazards of radiation exposure (Sproulll et al., 2017). The ionizing radiation and their types, such as alpha, gamma, X-ray, and neutron, are crucial for amplifying awareness of their risk for better mitigation of the consequences (Sproulll et al., 2017). In this regard, X-rays and gamma are the greatest risk imposers as they directly impact human tissues (Sproulll et al., 2017). Alpha and beta radiations have comparatively lower risks as they have less power to penetrate the human body (Sproulll et al., 2017).

Moreover, acute radiation syndrome (ARS) is a major threat when exposed to high levels of radiation that appear in the form of biological injury (Sproulll et al., 2017). The severity of the injury could be detected from the level of radiation the body was exposed to, subsyndromes that were altered, and other relevant syndromes that are hematopoietic, gastrointestinal, neurovascular, and cutaneous (Sproulll et al., 2017).

Societal Issues Regarding Radiation Environmental Risk

Research has indicated that a high socioeconomic impact has been observed for greater poverty segments in the population being exposed to radiation than those living in posh areas (Freeman et al., 2012). For this reason, they are victims of diagnostic testing of the radiation, and their lives are endangered due to this frequent practice. The disease burden is, therefore, higher in these subgroups, critically explaining a strong association between low socioeconomic status and high radiation exposure and its pertinent risks (Freeman et al., 2012).

Further, societal and ethical implications could be witnessed regarding people’s livelihood. The Kursk nuclear submarine’s innocence resulted in the loss of marine life and the lives of 350 people whose income generation was destroyed due to radioactive contamination of water (Oughton & Howard, 2012, p. 73).

Management Steps for Radiation Effects

Medical professionals should take accurate measures to reduce the risk of radiation exposure. Unnecessary diagnosis for x-ray reports should be avoided, especially the prescription frequency should be considered for serious patients who need a CT scan or MRI (Jain, 2021). Although these rays are not harmful to the body, repetitive radio-imaging applications might not benefit health (Jain, 2021).

It also depends on the radiologist’s expertise, who should know how much exposure is to be given to a specific body area for which the doctor prescribes an x-ray scan (Jain, 2021). The only pointed area of the body should be exposed to radiation with the least parameters, particularly for pediatric patients (Jain, 2021). Appropriate training and education of the radiologist matter to a large extent for risk reduction of radiation exposure.

Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) is a beneficial method to determine the long-term nutritional processes of the body tissues. Yet, the radiation exposure of this mechanism is questioned as compared to Ultrasonography, which is considered less harmful.

Quantitative ultrasound (QUS) is considered better and tends to replace the DEXA technique, specifically for osteoporosis patients (Jain, 2021). It makes accurate calculations to detect fractures that mostly occur in low bone mass and bone mineral density (BMD) (Jain, 2021).

For radiation therapies, only FDA-approved radiation elements must be incorporated into the treatment, which is only amifostine, a radioprotective agent, at the moment (Mettler et al., 2011). Although it has side effects, research is in progress to make it more favorable for the patients as other than that; no compound is FDA approved. Still, it requires the careful deployment of medical experts for undertaking evidence-based procedures and practices in CT examinations and any form of human association.

A normal person can mitigate the risk effects of radiation exposure in his daily routine on his own with three factors: time, shielding, and distance (Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, n.d.). The length of time a person could be exposed to radiation, such as X-rays and other related radiation, should be considered as radiation would get absorbed to the maximum extent with this dose. Distance from radiation could alleviate the effect on the human body, hence, lesser tissue or organ damage for the person. The shielding is another important aspect contributing to risk reduction as lead glasses, shields on mobile screens, and barriers could help reduce X-rays and gamma rays, the most hazardous of all (Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, n.d.).