Important Notice: Our web hosting provider recently started charging us for additional visits, which was unexpected. In response, we're seeking donations. Depending on the situation, we may explore different monetization options for our Community and Expert Contributors. It's crucial to provide more returns for their expertise and offer more Expert Validated Answers or AI Validated Answers. Learn more about our hosting issue here.

Has DOL used an unreasonable standard for accepting cancers caused solely by radiation?

0
Posted

Has DOL used an unreasonable standard for accepting cancers caused solely by radiation?

0

A – Coverage under Part E requires a finding that it is “at least likely as not” that exposure to a toxic substance at a Department of Energy facility was a significant factor in aggravating, contributing to, or causing the illness. DOL’s regulations utilize the probability of causation system developed for Part B. The probability of causation program developed by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Heath (NIOSH) estimates the number of cancers that occurred as a result of exposures to radiation in addition to those that would have occurred without any exposure to radiation. Since this includes all the cancers that would not have occurred but for the radiation exposure, the determination of “probability of causation” includes both cancers that are “caused” and those that are “contributed to” by radiation. (A cancer cannot be “aggravated” by exposure to radiation.) Thus, DOL has neither deviated from the explicit language of the act nor set an unreasonably high standard f

What is your question?

*Sadly, we had to bring back ads too. Hopefully more targeted.