TY - JOUR
T1 - The present ICRP protection quantitites are seriously flawed. Opposing the proposition.
AU - Edwards, Alan
N1 - Copyright:
This record is sourced from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
PY - 2003
Y1 - 2003
N2 - Our debaters have agreed to defend positions that appear to be diametrically opposed; nevertheless, they have acknowledged some common ground. Although it was not explicitly stated, they would no doubt agree that workers and the public are adequately protected by our present system of radiation regulations. Our debaters have overtly agreed that it would be desirable to have measurable radiation protection quantities. Whether or not this is advantageous, or even possible, will depend upon which argument swayed your opinion. The ICRP is presently examining its recommendations and will, over the next few years, update those recommendations. Therefore, the contributions of our debaters will surely be relevant to this process.
AB - Our debaters have agreed to defend positions that appear to be diametrically opposed; nevertheless, they have acknowledged some common ground. Although it was not explicitly stated, they would no doubt agree that workers and the public are adequately protected by our present system of radiation regulations. Our debaters have overtly agreed that it would be desirable to have measurable radiation protection quantities. Whether or not this is advantageous, or even possible, will depend upon which argument swayed your opinion. The ICRP is presently examining its recommendations and will, over the next few years, update those recommendations. Therefore, the contributions of our debaters will surely be relevant to this process.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=2142716805&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Comment/debate
C2 - 12862250
AN - SCOPUS:2142716805
SN - 0144-8420
VL - 104
SP - 85
EP - 87
JO - Radiation Protection Dosimetry
JF - Radiation Protection Dosimetry
IS - 1
ER -
