The study of radiological risk assessment plays a crucial role in understanding the potential impact of radioactive elements on the environment and human health. Uranium, thorium, and potassium are naturally occurring radioactive elements commonly found in various geological formations worldwide. Their presence in aquatic ecosystems, such as rivers, lakes, and reservoirs, raises concerns regarding potential exposure and associated risks to aquatic organisms and humans (Ajayi et al., 2018; Syarbaini et al., 2014; Hamidalddin et al., 2016). In October 2023, two fish samples were obtained from Baga, Kukawa, Borno State. Sample A was catfish, while Sample B was tilapia. The amounts of uranium, thorium, and potassium were the main topics of the radiological risk assessment performed on the samples. Following a seven-day sun-drying process, the fish were ground into a powder and carefully sent to the Obafemi Awolowo University's Centre for Energy Research and Development in Ile-Ife, Osun State. The findings showed that both catfish and tilapia contain certain radionuclides (uranium, thorium, and potassium), their anticipated annual effective dose rates from consumption are relatively modest. It was discovered that the computed dose rates for tilapia (Sample B) and catfish (Sample A) were significantly lower than the global average for the yearly effective dosage limit for the general public, which is normally set at 1 millisievert (mSv) annually. In particular, the estimated annual effective dose rate were 3.190758 μSv/year and 4.021574 μSv/year for Sample A and B respectively. These results imply that eating tilapia and catfish is unlikely to expose the general public to radiation levels higher than dose recommended by international agreements. The investigation concludes that eating tilapia and catfish is compliant with international standards for radiation exposure from food. Nevertheless, maintaining ongoing food safety procedures depends on constant observation and adherence to changing regulations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sudaise et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: