The Truth About Nuclear Medicine, Production and Waste

A brief insight into answering the questions that have popped up in the anti-nuclear fringe. Mainly addressing claims that we don't need a medical reactor in Australia because we can import or use cyclotron production.

[@jarofranta153]

Excellent presentation.
The points about the cyclotron option versus reactor option in Canada is spot on.
As someone who retired from AECL seven years ago, and who sometimes worked on projects for the NRU reactor that produced Mo99 for medicine, I can certainly confirm everything you say about the situation in Canada.
As you say, the Canadian government invested many millions of dollars into the cyclotron option.
That was great for research, especially for the TRIUMF facility in British Columbia.
Indeed, that new financing is what these researchers were after in the first place.
But it did nothing to address the issue nationwide, following the shutdown of the old NRU reactor.
That is why there are plans underway now to start Mo99 production in a CANDU reactor power plant (some of which have been used to produce Cobalt-60 for many years).
Just for reference - useful for making comparisons with production rates - here is a nice table that lists Tc99m dosages for different diagnostic procedures, along with approximate radiation doses (note at bottom).
facebook.com/493843777362196/photos/p.1807169376029623/1807169376029623/

[@geoffcurrie968]

Thanks Jaro for the feedback. I do alot of work with our wonderful colleagues in Canada and visit usually annually. So it is a shame when people misrepresent the Canadian situation. Looking forward to seeing Canada back leading the world in production volumes using nuclear at CANDU :)

[@BrettBurnardStokes]

QUOTE - Tc-99m may soon stop being so widely needed as other technologies evolve.
“When the technetium market dies, technology that is specific for technetium production dies because it can’t be used for anything else, whereas a cyclotron can produce a variety of different isotopes for diagnostic imaging that are used in medicine,” McEwan said.
from www.radiologybusiness.com/topics/technology-management/researchers-canada-announce-tc-99m-breakthrough

[@geoffcurrie968]

Complete nonsense. The reactor does more than produce radionuclides (silicon doping for wind turbines for example) and produces some very important other radionuclides for diagnosis and therapy (177Lu for cancer therapy and 131I are examples). But uninformed parties regularly (for 30 years) predict the end of 99mTc as other thing emerge. But if anyone has passed year 3 maths they will know that a decrease in % (so 99mTc has dropped from 90% of nuc med studies to 80-85% depending on country) does not mean a decrease in actual numbers. Indeed, 99mTc studies have increased annually in Australia (latest figures 2% growth) and the % decrease is associated with more rapid growth in PET and therapy applications. So 99mTc use is growing!!! And the IAEA report that is 10% annually globally. This represents slower growth in established economies but rapid growth in 99mTc use in developing economies. Bangladesh for example has 160 million people serviced by less nuc med depts. than Sydney. Over coming decades that will grow significantly more than we are growing. But 99mTc use is growing in actual numbers. Decreases in Canada is simply the lack of availability since the reactor closed and cyclotrons can't meet the demand. Its artificial. And why Canada has now announced it will go back to reactor production using the CANDU power reactor!

[@Mark_Ocain]

Australia needs more than one research scale reactor site... The greenies mean well but they don't understand the utility of a reactor and all it's associated products.