“In fact, the FDA sets no official standard for lead in lipstick although it is reportedly considering one of 10 parts per million, the same number under discussion in Canada”.

You can access a complete results of the analysis at

http://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/ProductandIngredientSafety/ProductInformation/ucm137224.htm#expanalyses

PTIFeature Januray 28, 2012      PF-15/2012

Studies in Medical Imaging

By Dr K S Parthasarathy

Researchers can use imaging techniques to assess the microscopic changes in the brain’s white matter, which is composed of millions of nerve fibres called axons that act like communication cables connecting various regions of the brain.

The Nav Hind Times

Radiation Exposure: Is it Harmful or Beneficial?

Published on: February 4, 2012 – 00:10

BY K S PARTHASARATHY

Based on epidemiological studies of over fifty groups of about two million radiation exposed persons over the past several decades, specialists concluded that radiation may induce cancer at high doses.

At low doses typical in medical x-ray or nuclear medicine procedures we cannot prove the cancer inducing potential of radiation. This is because it is difficult to identify radiation induced cancers against the large number of normal cancers.
There are specialists who believe that radiation exposure at low levels is beneficial. A growing number of specialists think that low dose radiation exposure is not as harmful as was thought of so far.
No one knows whether there is a threshold dose above which only harmful effects manifest? Radiation protection depends on assumptions. We have to carry out experiments at low doses to resolve the issues scientifically.
Recently, Italian researchers claimed that low dose radiation exposure can induce biological and cellular changes that might offset the hazards of radiation. Probably, at low doses there may be protective mechanisms at work.
They studied interventional cardiologists – a group most exposed to ionising radiation among health professionals. They have a per capita exposure 2 to 3 times higher than that of radiologists.
Dr Gian Luigi Russo, Institute of Food Sciences, National Research Council, Rome and his coworkers chose ten healthy interventional cardiologists with an average age of 38 years, with a median radiation exposure of 4.7 mSv per year and lifetime exposure ranging between 20 to 100 mSv, working in the cardiac catheterization unit and
10 matched unexposed controls recruited from among the hospital and laboratory workers who did not have radiation exposure. (mSv is a unit of radiation dose; AERB prescribes an annual dose limit of 30mSv for
radiation workers)
The researchers measured many markers of oxidative metabolism in plasma, and in red blood cells (erythrocytes) and white blood cells (lymphocytes) in the two groups. In the exposed group, there was a threefold increase in hydrogen peroxide, a biochemical marker indicative of oxidative stress. When hydrogen peroxide is formed in the body, the body releases antioxidants to counteract the effect.
The researchers did not observe any significant change in the level of antioxidants in the two groups, may be because the bodies of the exposed groups generated adaptive response by activating antioxidant defence mechanisms to counteract the increase in hydrogen peroxide levels.
In interventional cardiologists, chronic exposure to low dose radiation may induce two
specific types of cellular defences against oxidative stress, the researchers argued in the August 23, 2011 issue of the European Heart Journal.
Firstly, the oxidative stress was found to be counter balanced by a 1.7 fold increase in glutathione, a measure of antioxidant response in the exposed group.
Secondly, the cardiologists exposed to radiation had significantly higher levels of Caspase-3 activity in their white blood cells. Capase-3 is a biochemical which is implicated in programmed cell deaths.
Capase-3 helps to eliminate damaged cells. This is beneficial as damaged cells may become cancerous, if they survive.
Both mechanisms may compensate for the unbalanced reactive oxygen species and contribute to maintain relatively stable equilibrium in the cell.
Other experiments carried out at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), an underground lab in New Mexico and at the Lovelace Respiratory Research Institute, Albuquerque gave interesting results (Health Physics, March 2011).
WIPP is located at a depth of 650 metre in the middle of a 610 metre thick ancient salt deposit that has been stable for more than 200 million years.
The radioactivity content of the salt deposit is extremely low. The radiation levels in the lab are ten times lower than the normal natural background radiation levels. The contribution to the background from potassium-40, the only identifiable radionuclide present in the lab can also be reduced further by using a modest amount of shielding. Massive, 650 metre thick, salt reduced the cosmic ray background.
Researchers incubated Deinococcus Radiodurans, a bacterium which is highly resistant to radiation, above-ground and in WIPP in a 15 cm thick pre-World War II steel chamber; that steel is not contaminated by traces of radio-nuclides from nuclear weapons fallout.
The radiation level underground was 20 per cent of the surface radiation levels and in the pre WW II chamber it was 30 per cent of those underground. Overall reduction was about 15 times.
Scientists monitored the bacterial growth by assaying for protein, optical density of the cultures and cell agar plate counts. Though data had relatively high variability, the three indicators of cell growth demonstrated that the cells grown underground were inhibited and grew increasingly so with increasing time underground (Health Physics, 2011).
In the second experiment, researchers exposed a type of human lung cells at 1.75 mGy per year; another sample of cells to 0.3 mGy per year by using a 10 cm lead shield. The former corresponds to a typical background radiation level. (Gy is a unit of radiation dose It is equal to an energy absorption of one joule per kg.). They controlled the temperature, carbon dioxide and humidity levels in the two incubators in which the cells were placed ensuring that these parameters were statistically the same. They analyzed the exposed cells directly by standard methods for the presence of heat shock proteins or by exposing the cells to a single x-ray dose of 0.10Gy and then assayed for heat shock proteins.
Shielding cells from natural radiation up-regulated (initiated the process of increasing the response to a stimulus) the expression of two out of three stress proteins and follow on x-ray exposure further up-regulated expression.
Results were similar with the bronchial epithelial cells. Both studies demonstrated a stress response when cells were grown under reduced radiation conditions. Does it show that radiation is necessary for normal growth?
It may lead to increasing the levels of radiation considered safe; it will have a profound impact on the economics of decommissioning nuclear facilities, long term storage of radioactive waste, construction of nuclear power facilities among others.
This was part of a $150 million, five-year long, low-dose research project recommended by 26 scientists highly regarded in radiobiology research community and representing competing radiation effects hypotheses. Let us hope that they will develop a model based on sound science.

Presently, one out of every 144 persons in USA are living with total knee replacement .The rise is sharpest among the youg. Osteoarthritsis is known to be the reasons. Other details are available at the following URL

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-02/aaoo-4ma020712.php

You may access the report at:

http://www.auntminnie.com/index.aspx?sec=sup&sub=imc&pag=dis&ItemID=98254&wf=4774

The study thus revealed that the percentages of particular tests that were ordered defensively:

• Radiography: 19
• CT scanning: 26
• MR imaging: 31
• Ultrasound: 44
• Referrals: 35
• Laboratory tests: 23
• Biopsies: 18

 THE BIHAR TIMES

A Passage to Bihar

February 7, 2012

Dr P K Iyengar: a doyen among sientists

Dr K S Parthasarathy

Dr P K Iyengar, one of the pioneers who along with his team toiled tirelessly to place India in the once forbidden, exclusive nuclear club is no more. He was 80.

He joined the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) in 1952.He served DAE in many capacities before retiring as Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission. He inspired a generation of young scientists and engineers in the field of nuclear science and technology.

He and Dr Raja Ramanna believed that if we want to get the most talented people in a developing country like India, we have to choose every year a few hundred from the vast pool of academically sound young people. If ten out of two hundred turn out to be outstanding, he rated this “statistical operation” as successful.

Iyengar was immensely proud of the multidisciplinary ambience provided at Trombay, which turned the outstanding young people, he chose, into leaders as they enhanced their analytic skills and creativity.

In 1956, he went to Chalk River, Canada; his association with Bertram Neville Brockhouse, later a Nobel Laureate, became a turning point in his career.

They measured the dispersion relations based on Born’s theory of lattice dynamics in germanium. Within three years, they published five papers on the neutron spectrum of germanium and manganese compounds.

When Brockhouse passed away, Dr Iyengar acknowledged him as his mentor and friend (Current Science, 10 December 2003). Brockhouse discovered a new branch of research, the neutron analogue of Raman Effect. Brockhouse-Iyengar collaboration turned out to be one of the most productive for India.

After Iyengar’s return to India, K R Rao, B A Dasannacharya and A P Roy worked with Brockhouse at Chalkriver and later after 1962, at McMaster University. In his Nobel Lecture titled “Slow neutron spectroscopy and the grand atlas of the physical world”, Dr, Brockhouse referred to his papers with Dr Iyengar and those with other collaborators. Iyengar set up a world class neutron scattering group in Trombay.

Iyengar’s enthusiasm for physics was infectious. He argued, cajoled and coaxed and woke up every one from deep slumber. Every minute spent with him was exciting and informative. Despite his indifferent health, he kept himself up to date.

He questioned every one constantly. “Why should they not use plutonium carbide as fuel for the fast breeder reactor?’, “They” meant scientists in the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research (IGCAR)! Is not fabricating plutonium carbide fuel very challenging? “Every one knows enough about plutonium oxide; what is so innovative about it?

In the next few minutes, he praised Brazil for making uranium enrichment technology more efficient. Tweaking the design of the rotors did the trick, he revealed. From fission to fusion, from “mega- gauss reactions” to superconductivity, he drove home his ideas effortlessly.

According to M. Srinvasan, a close associate, Iyengar was very sharp in his observations and had a keen eye for detail. He was strong in engineering design and had an elephantine memory.

Srinvasan remembers that when news papers covered “cold fusion”, Dr Iyengar who was always interested in exciting new things, convened a meeting of neutron physicists, chemists, chemical engineers, etc. Within six weeks, 12 groups started working on it.

Iyengar did not forgive me for writing an editorial titled “Fuss about fusion: more heat than light” in The AERB Newsletter (5, 1, 1989).The edit reflected the views of mainstream scientists. He admonished me for relying on popular magazines such as the New Scientist. Thereafter, whenever we met, he talked about the new developments in the field of “Low Energy Nuclear Reactions”.

Dr M R Iyer, another colleague remembers that Iyengar, a storehouse of anecdotes credited Dr A K Ganguly, a pioneering safety specialist with saving installations at Kalpakkam when 2004 tsunami stuck. In the seventies, Dr Ganguly insisted that key components near the coast must be installed on high pedestals. According to Iyengar, safety committee members even taunted Dr Ganguly as to “who is this Japanese girl: Tsunami?”

A scientometric portrait of Iyengar drawn by Kademani and co-workers in Library Science in 1994 revealed that he is eminently qualified to be a role model for the younger generation. He published prolifically in many technical journals. Many who retired from Trombay will miss their mentor; India will miss a restless leader who fearlessly argued for self reliance in very field of endeavour.

S& T

Published: January 26, 2012 01:39 IST | Updated: January 26, 2012 01:39 IST

Is the edifice of radiation protection built on a lie?

The Hindu THE WAY FORWARD: The public need to be educated regarding the importance of acceptable levels of risk. Photo: K.R. Deepak

The Linear No Threshold concept assumes that the risk from radiation exposure varies linearly with total dose with no threshold

Recently, Edward Calabrese, an environmental toxicologist at the University of Amherst found out that Dr Hermann J. Muller, famous radiation geneticist knowingly lied in his Nobel Prize lecture when he claimed that there was “no escape from the conclusion that there is no threshold.” Calabrese described his discovery in September in Archives of Toxicology and Environmental and Molecular Mutagenesis

In 1927, Muller discovered that x-ray irradiation produces mutations in male fruit-fly germ cells. For this, he received the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1946. Many believe that Muller’s assertion became a corner stone of radiation protection. This is the Linear No Threshold (LNT) concept which assumes that the risk from radiation exposure varies linearly with total dose with no threshold and any dose however small has an adverse effect.

Expert bodies accepted this model because of its simplicity in the management of radiation protection programmes.

“However, it has done much damage to speak of ‘no safe level of radiation’ in scaring not only the public, but also those professionally involved in peacetime health physics who have not been involved in high levels and emergency situations,” Allen Brodsky, Adjunct Professor of Radiation Science, Georgetown University responded to an e-mail query.

In response to an e-mail query Calabrese disclosed that a reviewer of his article on the history of dose-response argued that he had not done a good job on the Muller section and key early radiation mutation studies. Calabrese found that a paper from the University of Rochester by Curt Stern and Casper on fruit-fly irradiation and germ cell mutation was published in 1948 but it was actually completed in August of 1946.

“This study was very important because it did not support a linear dose response and because it was the strongest study to date…using the lowest dose rate etc. I knew that Muller gave his Nobel Prize lecture on Dec. 12, 1946. So the question was whether Muller was aware of the new findings before his major speech,” Calabrese replied

By reviewing Stern’s correspondence with Muller, Calabrese established that Muller knew of the findings which contradicted his theory a month prior to the Nobel Lecture.

Calabrese asserts that Muller’s passionate beliefs influenced the way government and society viewed the risks of low doses of radiation. The 1956 recommendations of the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS) BEAR (Biological Effects of Atomic Radiation) I Committee reflected these views. Regulating ionizing radiation as if there was no safe dose began!

James Schwartz, a biographer of Muller, Kenneth Muller, Hermann Muller’s grandson and Elof Axel Carlson, Muller’s former student do not agree with Calabrese. Some feel that Calabrese, a supporter of radiation hormesis (beneficial effect) has conflict of interest. The balance of evidence shows that the edifice of radiation protection is not built on a lie.

Dr Evan B. Douple, Associate Chief of Research at the Radiation Effects Research Foundation, Hiroshima, does not think that the LNT hypothesis would have lost its applicability if Professor Muller would not have made the passionate statement in his speech.

“……. by the time the BEIR (Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation) committees of the National Academy of Sciences began updating the risk estimates, the mutation risk was superseded by the risk of cancer. Having been intimately involved with the BEIR VI and BEIR VII studies, I can assure you that the voluminous data reviewed by the committee members that related to supporting or refuting LNT, was not swayed or overly influenced by the shape of a dose-response curve in the mutation work of Muller,” Douple responded. (Dr Douple was Director, Board on Radiation Effects Research, National Research Council)

He is not even sure that Calabrese’s interpretation and assessment that Muller was deceptive in his presentation is necessarily accurate or fair.

“Although somatic mutations became a dogma for radiation carcinogenesis, the LNT for carcinogenesis was based on (a) analyses of cancer induction in rodent models, (b) biophysical characteristics of energy deposition, ionizations, and DNA damage in cells, and (c) the early epidemiological studies of cancer in the Japan A-bomb survivors,” he clarified in an e-mail.

He does not think that the conjecture and personal interpretation of an untestable accusation will have significant impact among the radiation protection community.

Prof Ludwig E. Feinendegen, Heinrich-Heine University, Germany thought that “the new revelations on low-dose effects in the realm of biological responses are making an impact on the radiation protection community — as it appears currently from the defensive manner of their arguments for keeping the LNT model, at least for the time being. Calabrese has done us a great favour by his new paper on Mueller’s mistake.”

That there is no safe level of radiation continues to be a useful assumption in radiation protection. It is yet to be proved as a scientific fact.

Douple believes that the exhaustive efforts of those who claim that demonstrating hormesis (beneficial effect) or the presence of thresholds will revolutionize the radiation protection field are misguided.

“We need to educate the public regarding the importance of ‘acceptable levels of risk’—levels that are believed to include risks, but risks for adverse effects that are so small that one would not be able to observe and measure an excess of the effects with a realistic study. Only then will the fear and paranoia associated with radiation effects gradually become less and less and sources for energy production can be fairly and objectively be evaluated,” Douple proposed as a realistic way forward.

Regulators want dose limits for enforcing radiation protection. What is the threshold dose value they will accept for enforcement? Calabrese and his followers have not yet responded to my query.

The French Academy of Sciences, the only scholarly body which has views closer to those of Calabrese on hormesis conceded that on the basis of present knowledge, it is not possible to define the threshold level (between 5 and 50 mSv) or to provide the evidence for it. The dose limit for workers recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) is 20 mSv per year averaged over five years with no year exceeding 50 mSv. The dose levels to radiation workers achievable are so low that the risk from them is negligible. Negligible risk is no risk at all. That we cannot rule out beneficial effects of radiation is also a comforting thought.

K.S. Parthasarathy

Raja Ramanna Fellow, Department of Atomic Energy (ksparth@yahoo.co.uk)

Keywords: radiation exposure

Atomic Energy Act 1948 and 1962 and the administrative set up developed to implement the programme helped India’s march towards self-sufficiency in the field of atomic energy.

A few factors helped the implementation of the atomic energy programme. Firstly, Bhabha’s vision and Nehru’s mission coincided!

Secondly, the Atomic Energy Commission, set up through a Government Resolution on March 1, 1958, replacing the one set up in 1948 has a unique status.

Dr Homi Bhabha and Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, the architects of nuclear India, realized the need for evolving a flexible, executive and administrative machinery to respond to the needs of this nascent field. In setting up the Atomic Energy Commission, the Government considered the special requirements of atomic energy, the newness of the filed, the strategic nature of its activities and its international and political significance. The Government realized that the developments in the field of atomic energy called “for an organization with full authority to plan and implement the various measures on sound technical and economic principles and free from all non essential restrictions or needlessly inelastic rules”.

Thirdly, the order of 1954, setting up the Department of Atomic Energy allocated the Department to the charge of the Prime Minister, signifying the priority and importance given to the programme. DAE became the executive arm of AEC

Fourthly, DAE enjoys many unique privileges. It can execute civil works without approaching the Ministry of Works, Housing and Supply; it can make purchases directly without routing them through the Directorate General of Supplies and Disposals (DGS&D). DAE can recruit personnel directly without approaching the Union Public Service Commission.

Fifth factor is that within the limits of the budget provision, approved by Parliament, the Commission has full powers of the Government of India, both administrative and financial, for carrying out the work of the Department of Atomic Energy. Believe it or not, the administrative model for the Commission, Dr Bhabha and Nehru chose was that of the Railway Board.

The constitution of the AEC made a provision that if required, the Commission can secure deviations from normal administrative and financial procedures by making direct submissions to the Prime Minister and getting his approval

Discriminatory embargoes delayed Indian nuclear programme; however, embargoes could not stop India’s progress. Indian scientists could develop the required technologies based on indigenous effort. Some of the factors referred to helped in achieving success in this commendable mission.

In 1908, Herr Schomberg, a German chemist identified the presence of monazite (thorium ore) in the sand remnants sticking to coir imported from Kerala. As thorium oxide was in great demand in gas mantle industry, he set up the first plant to separate monazite at Manavalakurichi (MK) in 1910 and later another plant at Chavara. Both plants shut shop when Government arrested Schomberg on charges of being a German spy during the First World War. Companies changed hands. Until 1940, the export by various companies was as high as 300,000 tons of minerals.

Before the Second World War, United States, Britain, France and Germany extracted the sands for use in gas mantle industry. According to Itty Abraham who wrote The Making of the Indian Atomic Bomb, after the start of the war, the India’s War Trade Intelligence Department tightened control for fear that Germany would attempt to refine the sands for thorium.

In 1947, there were rumours that the Travancore Durbar (the administrative set up in the former princely State of Travancore) had entered into an agreement with the British Government for the disposal of monazite and thorium nitrate.

C.P. Ramaswamy Iyer, the ambitious Dewan of Travancore, permitted the minerals attaché of the US Embassy to survey the region’s monazite sands in the hopes of attracting bids from US firms. USA, like other foreign countries coveted the beach sands of Travancore as it contained the world’s richest deposit of thorium. These sands were sought after because when processed, they yielded many “rare earth compounds

As desired by the scientists who attended the science congress in 1947, Nehru ensured the passing of the Atomic Energy Act 1948 which prohibited foreign exploitation of these resources and ensured their state control. As the activities in the field of atomic energy grew manifold, the Parliament repealed the Atomic Energy Act 1948 and promulgated the more comprehensive Atomic Energy Act 1962.

Ms Monto and Malhotra summarized my talk thus:

“The perception of danger in nuclear energy started in the 1970s and the perception of risk started with it, said K. S. Parthasarathy (Department of Atomic Energy, Mumbai). He pointed out that knowledge about nuclear energy is poorand fear is extraordinarily high, which has been amplified by the attitude of secrecy and consequent creation of mistrust. He discussed the myths and realities related to nuclear waste management, accidents and proliferation, atomic bombs, terrorism and biological effects. For example, persons living in areas with high background radiation or high radon levels would receive higher radiation doses than the average dose to nuclear power plant workers, and these two typeof radiation (natural and man-made) are exactly the same.”

In the passing away of Shri.P.N.Krishnamoorthy, popularly known as “PNK” on November 16 this year, the country lost a pioneer in radiological protection, an outstanding scientist and an able administrator. Largely by his efforts and Dr Homi Bhabha’s support he could establish a robust safety frame work to initiate steps to enforce radiological safety requirements nation wide in institutions using radiation sources for medical, industrial, agricultural and research, many years before the Central Government set up the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board, a dedicated body to enforce safety provisions under the relevant Sections of the Atomic Energy Act 1962 (33 of 1962).

Early years

PNK was born on 12 th July 1927 to (Late) Sri P.K.Nilakantan & (Late) Smt Alamelu. Shri Nilakantan worked as Accounts Officer in the office of the Accountant General in Rangoon when the war broke out. He came back to India in 1942 in the thick of the war and was posted in Allahabad till 1945.
He returned to Rangoon after the war, but came back to India in 1949 after Burma got Independence. He worked in the Central Tractor Organisation till 1955, when he joined Damodar Valley Corporation (DVC) in Bokaro and then Durgapur and retired in 1962.
PNK had his initial education in Rangoon in B.E.T. High School. His father was a great musician and music lover. At the tender age of seven, PNK started learning music under him. PNK won awards in many competitions in Bharatiyar music and classical Carnatic Music. He also acted as Naradar (singing and acting) in many dramas; Shri. Chari, the prinipal of B E T School, was all praise for his acting talents.

PNK was to have appeared in the SSLC in 1942, when the family came by the last ship to Madras. The SSLC exam was in April. The erstwhile Madras SSLC Board gave him special permission to appear for the exam; he came out with flying colours. He joined Government Victoria College, Palghat and did his B.Sc. He was fairly good at playing Tennis and was a keen dramatist.
In 1947, he joined Wilson College, Bombay. During his post graduate programme, he came into contact with Prof. H.J.Taylor; Prof. Taylor was also a keen Tennis player.

Work at TIFR
Dr Homi Bhabha had set up the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR) in June 1945. Immediately, he organized experimental cosmic ray research under three different groups. Professor Taylor who was professor of physics in Wilson college simultaneously led the nuclear emulsion group; A.S.Rao and A.B.Sahiar led the high altitude study group and the cloud chamber group respectively (B.V.Sreekantan, Current Science, 10 Dec, 1991).
According to Professor R. R. Daniel, the research group consisted of fresh M.Scs in their twenties with one to three years of introduction to research (Current Science, 10 Dec, 1991). PNK joined TIFR initially as a research student and later continued as a research assistant.
He actively participated in the balloon launching experiments. In a typical launch, they used 32 balloons filled with hydrogen and attached to a 400 feet line to lift 40 kg of equipment to heights of 40,000 to 94,555 feet. Fascinated by these efforts, Professor Bernard Peters, eminent cosmic ray physicist from the University of Rochester came to TIFR for the first time in 1950 and later accepted the invitation of Dr Bhabha to stay back till 1957. He set up a group carrying out outstanding research in one of the most exciting fields.
PNK co-authored a paper titled “High Altitude Balloon Experiments and Measurement of the Heavy Primary Radiation Flux at the Geomagnetic Equator” (Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Sciences, July 1952) with H J Taylor and M.Sitaramaswami. Using stacks of nuclear emulsions and other simple and elegant experimental set up, they measured the heavy primary radiation flux at the equator. The team carried out the study directly under the guidance of Prof. Peters.
The list of persons working in the field as given at the end of PNK’s paper included R. R. Daniel, D.Lal, K.G.Vohra, Yash Pal among others.
Nuclear emulsion was the most important medium used for recording cosmic ray particles. Shrinkage of nuclear emulsion adversely affected cosmic ray studies. PNK ingeniously solved the problem by replacing silver halide in the emulsion during the fixing stage, by adding Canada balsam (Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Sciences, May 1957). Professor Peters communicated the paper to the journal. PNK thus had the opportunity to work with some of the finest brains in the world.
Tryst with radiological protection.
Shortly, he shifted away from cosmic ray work. Loss of cosmic ray study group was a gain for the then newly emerging field of radiological protection!
In 1959, A S Rao, a close associate of Dr Bhabha, asked PNK to take over the Radiological Measurements Laboratory (RML). Rao set up RML to provide radiological protection services to institutions outside the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE).
That was a watershed in PNK’s career. The use of radioisotopes in medicine, industry, agriculture and research was increasing rapidly. RML provided personnel dose monitoring services, surveyed medical x-ray units and started developing radiation measuring instruments. The extracts from the annual reports of DAE from 1959-1964 indicate the rapid progress made in the field of radiological protection. (Old timers may see typical drafting skills of PNK!)

Annual report 1959-60

Annual report 1960-61 (RML changed into RMS during this period)

The initiation of gonad dose measurements nation wide, is explained thus:

We can see the beginning of R & D in making radiation measuring instruments in the following:

Not many may know that RMS, under PNK, contributed to the amendment of the Atomic Energy Act 1948. Please see the following extracts from the Annual report of DAE 1960-61:

The beginning of various training programmes is referred to in the DAE Annual report of 1960-61:

DAE Annual reports appear to have undergone some drastic pruning. The report for the year 1960-61 had 73 pages; the Annual report of 1961-62 had only 17 pages. The RMS report was just one para. The assistance to Burma started.

During 1962-63, nothing remarkable took place except that the service component of RMS increased. The report of Film Badge Service etc appears under Health Physics Division. During 1961-1963, PNK was abroad serving the International Atomic Energy Agency (Please see under Service abroad with the IAEA).
Extracts of Annual Report of 1963-64: (DRP set up. First one year post-graduate training concluded)

From 1959 to 1972, PNK implemented with evangelic zeal a nation-wide, radiological protection programme. In 1970, the International Radiation Protection Association invited him to deliver a talk on “Radiological Protection Problems in the Developing Countries” (Health Physics, August 1971) at its Second International Congress at Brighton, England.
At 43 , he was among the handful of the youngest radiation protection specialists to address the meeting. His speech must be made compulsory reading material for all budding radiation protection professionals.
With his customary eloquence and clarity of thought, he listed the daunting difficulties faced by developing countries in implementing an effective radiological protection programme. The audience listened to his memorable talk with rapt attention when he listed the problems faced by developing countries and the solutions

He highlighted many issues.
“…in developing countries, the principal radiation source is….the diagnostic x-ray machine. It is also the principal source of radiation hazard to the doctor, and to the technician; and thanks very often to the dilapidated state of the machine and to the well below par work practices adopted, to the patients as well”, he added.
He pointed out that another source of radiation hazard is the use of radium needles and tubes in cancer therapy. Inadequate storage and handling facilities, employment of relatively outmoded techniques both for preparation and for the application of these sources lead to excessive exposures.
He listed the difficulties observed in industrial and research applications of radiation.
“ The relatively bleak picture that has been painted….is fortunately only the initial phase that one is confronted with, in the implementation of a countrywide radiation safety programme; for, it has been our experience that a radiation protection survey of any installation by a qualified team of experts , which is followed by appropriate advice to the radiation workers in the installation of safe work practices, almost always results in a dramatic fall in the average radiation doses to the workers”, he assured the audience, quoting quantitative data on doses to workers.
His insight on the state of mind and the attitude of young persons joining the profession and the need to fruitfully employ them was evident while he stated thus:
“…..when a large number of capable young men and women with good basic science or engineering degrees are brought together in a service organization of this type, it is inevitable that they should yearn for a part of their time and efforts to be alloted for research. For a radiation protection programme to maintain its basic vitality of approach, it is imperative that in the equilibrium state, about 60% to 70% of the effort should be routine, about 20% developmental and the rest research”. Often, I get a feeling that lately, radiation protection specialists are moving away from this time-tested scheme.
PNK ensured that his staff set apart some time for R & D, in spite of an enormous load of service responsibility
The approach advocated by PNK and followed by his successors helped in establishing, proactive, dynamic and successful R & D efforts which made priceless contributions to the programme. An excellent instance is the development of a totally indigenous calcium sulphate based, dysprosium activated thermoluminiscent dosimeter which replaced film badges in the field of personnel dose monitoring. The TLD group achieved enviable progress and was one of the finest and most advanced R & D programme for a developing country. It may very well be an example for developed nations.
The therapy- dose monitoring programme based on TLD continues to help accurate delivery of radiation doses to cancer patients nation wide. The battery powered, secondary standard dosimeter (Farmer type) is another example-some of them still reported to be functioning satisfactorily.
Other items referred to by him included the need for developing primary and secondary standards, radiation measuring instruments and availability of trained medical physicists cum radiological safety officers.
At the end of his speech at Brighton, he gave a satisfactory answer to a vexing question. Though the Atomic Energy Act was promulgated in 1962, Radiation Protection Rules 1971, the first subordinate legislation was issued only in 1971.
“ This is because, we have found that the promulgation of rules and regulations in respect of radiation protection should be preceded by vigorous measures of the type, I have outlined…” he suggested.
“ The countrywide radiation protection programme, particularly in a developing country, should in my opinion, never start off with the promulgation of rules and regulations in respect of radiation protection.On the contrary, adequate expertise and instrumentation backed up by realistic field training measures should be developed in the first instance to effectively implement a radiation protection programme”, he asserted.
He listed various elements to be readily available for effective regulatory control of radiation sources.
DRP and PNK
When Dr Homi Bhabha set up the Directorate of Radiation Protection (DRP) in 1963 to provide an effective radiation protection programme nationwide, PNK was the natural choice to lead the mission. A.S.Rao gave him free hand. PNK applied his administrative acumen and organizational skill to establish the programme which thrived under his leadership.

DRP diligently provided personnel dose monitoring services, developed procedures to approve site plans and to license users of radiation sources and equipment, prepared safety standards and organized training programmes. The Radiation Protection Rules 1971 drafted by his team was the first piece of subordinate legislation under the Atomic Energy Act 1962. It reigned supreme till it was replaced by Atomic Energy (Radiation Protection) Rules, 2004.

The one year post graduate training course in radiological physics which, the erstwhile Atomic Energy Establishment Trombay (AEET) started got recognition from University of Bombay. It offered the Diploma in Radiological Physics (Dip R.P.) PNK was instrumental in successfully establishing medical physics as an essential and well respected discipline in the country by stipulating the legal requirement that hospitals handling radiation sources for radiation therapy must appoint a qualified Radiological Safety Officers (RSO) cum Medical physicists.

With the support from the WHO, PNK could get many eminent visiting scientists (Hanson Blatz, Ritchie, James Turner, Larry Lanzl, Swindon among others) to deliver lectures at the one year postgraduate training programme.Some of the trainees performed remarkably well and occupy positions of distinction abroad.
“The one quality of PNK, was the enormous preparation he put into any job he was doing”, Dr G Venkataraman who worked with him closely from 1958 to 1973 remembered.

“PNK laid the foundation for radiological protection in India”, Dr. U.Madhwanath another long term associate said. Under various programmes, PNK sent about thirty persons to hospitals in UK, Canada, Australia, Sweden etc. for training. They formed a core group of teachers for the one year training course in radiological physics and short term training programmes for radiation workers in industries, hospitals and other institutions.

Service abroad with IAEA

While serving the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), as a consultant, PNK co-authored the Health Physics Addendum (July 1960) with Mr G J Appleton of the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority. This was the first Addendum to the Manual on Safe Handling of Radioisotopes, the first operational safety standard of the IAEA and was meant for small scle users of radiation sources.

During 1961 to 1963, PNK served the IAEA as Senior Officer (P5 grade) in the Division of Health Safety and waste Disposal. He was actively involved in organizing and providing technical advice worldwide on research and development programmes in health physics and radiation safety.

He served as Consultant to the legal Division of the Agency. He was associated with the studies on the radiation hazards of space travel and worldwide waste management issues.He represented the Agency on many international meeting on these subjects.

Besides these, he served IAEA, World Health Organization (WHO) and International Labour Organization ( ILO) as a Consultant on radiation safety and associated problems. He delivered lectures at many international training courses on the legal aspects of atomic energy. He attended nearly 60 international symposia and panels as an invited expert.

He was designated Alternate Governor from India to the IAEA.He repesented India on the Board of Governors of the IAEA in 20 meetings in this capacity. He went on technical assistance missions for international organizations on many occasions to various countries.

PNK , the wordsmith

In 1954, Dr. Homi Bhabha wrote a one page “summary note” to Pandit Nehru on his vision on atomic power generation. Brief and to the point, Bhabha’s letters reflect his clarity of thought. A handful of people in the Department of Atomic Energy acquired the drafting skill of their mentor. PNK was undoubtedly one of them.
PNK set up a “Cell” to collect, collate and preserve information relevant to the atomic energy programme. He informally chose a few young scientists with aptitude to learn, to man the “Cell”.They included A.N Nandakumar, V. N Neelavathy, T S Subramanian, R B Vora among others. PNK equipped the “Cell” with modern electronic gadgets (electronic printers, copiers, slide projectors etc.). He loved them.
“Cell” inmates could produce conscise reports on any topic at short notice. The rough drafts they prepared underwent rigourous editing, review and critical appraisal by PNK, who was the pricipal ‘wordsmith’! He used his scissors mercilessly, chipped, chiselled and sharpened the text. Often, they were briefs for Dr Vikram Sarabhai, Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission. That the material originated from the “Cell” was not a State secret! Probably not many knew that from 1967 to 1972, Dr Sarabhai appointed PNK as Staff Consultant, Atomic Energy Commission.We were benefited by our association with the Cell. Some of us turned into wordsmiths!
In addition to the work as Deputy Director, DRP, PNK was associated during 1964-66, with Dr Homi Bhabha in the work of the Scientific Advisory Committee to the Cabinet of which Dr. Bhabha was the Chairman. During most of 1957 to 1973, PNK was closely associated with the Department of Atomic Energy, on the legal, international and technical aspects of its work. He assisted DAE in drafting many international cooperation agreements and international legal treaties in the field of atomic energy

Service to Department of Electronics
Shortly, PNK went to the Department of Electronics as Director (Technical).He dealt with problems connected with manpower development in the field of electronics in the country. He was associated with the upgrading of existing training programmes ,and the setting up of a number of new electronics training programmes including the formulation of syllabi and setting up of the laboratories and other facilities for such programmes. He was responsible for external relations in the field of electronics and negotiated many agreements for cooperation and commercial /technical collaboration in the field of electronics with many countries.
Service as Controller , BARC
Later, he returned to BARC as its Controller. He introduced several long lasting administrative measures in BARC, revamped the way various transactions are formally carried out. He introduced computer friendly, application forms in different colours and centralized the filing system wherever appropriate. His dedicated efforts led to the improvement in the accountability of personnel at different levels. He implemented new procedures to improve the alertness of security personnel.

Contributions to AERB

During the early 70s, there was a proposal to set up an independent Atomic Energy Control Board, the predecessor of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board. Sadly, this was shelved because of frailties in interpersonal relations. It got delayed by over a decade.

Homi Sethna who followed Dr Sarabhai as his successor,  did not endorse an important decision taken by Dr. Vikram Sarabhai. In 1963, Bhabha established the Directorate of Radiation Protection (DRP) in BARC to enforce radiation safety provisions in non-DAE Units. In 1971, as decided by Sarabhai, DRP was constituted as a separate constituent unit of the DAE. He wanted to set it up as Directorate of Health and Safety under an Atomic Energy Regulatory Authority (AERA). But, Sarabhai died before AERA was set up. Sethna brought DRP back to BARC. Interestingly, in 1981, a committee set up by Sethna recommended constitution of theAtomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB), if necessary, by amending the Atomic Energy Act (1962), to make it a statutory organization. In November 1983, 12 years after the initial decision, Raja Ramanna implemented the committee’s decision and set up AERB as a separate agency.

Finally when Central Government set up the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board in 1983, thanks to PNK’s deep personal commitment and endeavours, there existed a fairly well organized safety frame work in the form of DRP to enforce safety requirements in radiation installations outside the Department of Atomic Energy and more importantly, he himself joined the Board as its Member Secretary. He brought the first batch of officers who formed the core group to jumpstart the regulatory activities of AERB.

“He served the Board with distinction during its formative years and contributed significantly in establishing robust and well laid out procedures to assist the nascent organization in to an effective regulatory body”. Shri S K Sharma, Chairman,AERB acknowledged in a condolence message.

“He liberally contributed his vast knowledge borne out of decades of experience, for the benefit of the Board as its Member Secretary” he added.

PNK, the connoisseur of music

After his retirement in July 1987, PNK spent his entire life promoting music, which according to many, was his first love. He was Director of the Sangeetha Vidyalaya of Shanmukhanada Sabha since November 2002. He was Honorary Editor of Shanmukha, the quarterly magazine of the Sabha

“He lead a spartan life, devoted his entire retired life to his first love: i.e Carnatic Music, its propagation among the interested masses by giving free lessons at the door step of his students. He used to travel all over the place by even public transport through out the year with great punctuality whether it was rain or shine”, Shri T.K.Sankaranarayanan, along term associate of PNK reminded the participants of a well attended condolence meeting organised by the Bhakta Rasika Ranjini Sabha, Anushaktinagar . He was the heart and soul of the Bhakta Rasika Ranjini Sabha, Anushaktinagar.
The Sabha invited me to talk on PNK’s scientific contributions particularly to the field or radiation protection. I could sense the deeply felt sentiments and respect to the departed soul. The overpowering sentiments of his disciples may be seen if you access the following URL

http://rasikas.org/forum/topic11395-end-of-an-era-shri-pnkrishnamoorthy.html

For many decades, he wrote critical reviews of Carnatic and Hindustani music and dance programmes for The Indian Express. He reviewed nearly a thousand concerts and several hundred dance performances. He wrote two hundred articles on music in the Sunday edition of The Economic Times. For many years, he was a member of the “Sur Singar Samsad Peeth” and served its Senate as vice chairman. He served All India Radio (AIR) as a Judge for selecting musicians for AIR awards, a member of jury for the classification of Carnatic musicians, and as a member of the southern panel of the Music Audition.
PNK’s personal qualities
PNK seldom showed pessimism. During several decades of close association with him only once I noticed that he was overpowered by grief and struggled to control his emotions. That was on January 24, 1966 when he heard of the tragic death of Dr.Bhabha. He had excellent rapport with Bhabha.
Next day the entire staff of AEET assembled before the nearly finished Modular Laboratories to pay homage to the departed leader. PNK read the condolence message. I still remember his emotional, tremulous voice solemnly articulating the sorrow and helplessness of all the participants. It touched everyone.
After the formation of DRP, Bhabha approved large scale recruitment for the organization. At one time, DRP had nearly 50 young officers in SO(A) grade. Because of paucity of space, we worked in two shifts. PNK worked in both shifts, 8.30 AM to 8 PM every day!
Some of us had our seats in a sort of Mezzanine floor close to the asbestos roof in the Electronic shed. It was unbearably hot. Every one complained. During the idle hours, I borrowed a thermometer from the Standardization Group, measured the temperature and plotted it against time to produce a telling graph. The temperature slowly increased from the morning. From 11 AM to 5 PM, it remained steady often above 38 degree celsius! PNK saw it during one of his rounds. I waited with bated breath not knowing how he will react to my “un official” experiment. He appreciated it and showed the graph to A S Rao. The roof got an intermittent water spray from the very next week, a measure which did not offer much relief!
On November 23 this year Dr. Y S Mayya, Head, Radiological Physics and Advisory Division, BARC organised a condolence meeting to pay tributes to the memory of PNK. Dr G. Venkataraman, Dr P. S. Nagarajan, Shri P. S.Viswanathan, Dr. A. S Pradhan and Dr K.S.Parthasarathy
PNK was among the handful of surviving stalwarts mentored by Homi Bhabha. His departure signifies the end of an era.