Radiation Safety Practice Exam

When considering ALARA, what determines if actions to reduce radiation exposure are justifiable?

1. If actions do more harm than good

2. If actions minimize costs

3. If actions do more good than harm

4. If actions follow strict regulations

The correct answer is: If actions do more good than harm

The principle of ALARA, which stands for "As Low As Reasonably Achievable," focuses on minimizing radiation exposure while balancing the benefits of actions taken against the potential risks involved. When evaluating whether actions to reduce radiation exposure are justifiable, the core consideration is whether those actions provide a net benefit—that is, if they result in more good than harm. In this context, good refers to the reduction of radiation exposure and the associated risk of adverse health effects, while harm can encompass the potential negative consequences of implementing safety measures, such as financial costs, delays in patient treatment, or reduced access to necessary services. Therefore, if an action effectively reduces exposure to radiation while the downsides—such as discomfort or inconvenience—are proportionately low, it can be considered justified under ALARA. By ensuring that any interventions lead to a greater overall benefit to health and safety compared to their downsides, this choice aligns perfectly with the ALARA philosophy, which emphasizes reasonableness and practicality in radiation safety practices.