Is X-ray harmful?

Lynn Poole discusses x-rays for treatment and diagnosis of disease and displays a recent report from the National Academy or Sciences and National Research Council on the biological effects of radiation. Dr. Russell Morgan, Director of Radiology Dept. at Johns Hopkins University, fields questions from members of the press: Nate Hazeltine, a "Washington Post" science writer; Pare Lorentz, a film producer; and Earl Ubell, a reporter and science editor with the "New York Herald Tribune". Dr. Morgan explains that x-rays affect both individual cells and the whole body, making them more susceptible to premature aging. He discusses the research by John Lawrence on the effects of radiation on mice and their extrapolation to man. He also notes a study on radiation vs. non-radiation workers that showed no difference in life spans of the two groups. It is the amount of radiation exposure that determines the effects of the damage. For example, a chest x-ray only delivers about 1/20th roentgen, a unit of radiation. However, Dr. Morgan discusses the feasibility of a reporting system for patients' total x-ray exposure and the need for a set of standards. And he does admit that the complexity and amount of radiation exposure is increasing in diagnostic studies and could double by 1960-65. A film clip demonstrates that this radiation exposure can be reduced by filtration, distance from the x-ray machine, length of time of exposure, and protection of areas not being radiated. Mr. Poole points out that Dr. Morgan has developed a fluoroscopy machine reducing by up to ten times the radiation time. In conclusion, Dr. Morgan discusses whether the Atomic Energy Commission or the U. S. Public Health Services should be responsible for the public's radiation health problems.