This book reports on the investigation of the public’s perception of Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Field (RF-EMF) radiation effects on health and well-being, in Malaysia. It elaborates on how understanding the impact of perceived risk is essential in order to investigate the explanatory value and effectiveness of interventions influencing these beliefs. The book expands on the knowledge and understanding of different risk perception related to radiation in order to explain the gap in literature regarding the relationship between risk perceptions that lead to public behaviors. In doing so, the book presents empirical findings of a national study that unveils two key factors affecting public risk perceptions: psycho-graphic and personal factors. It offers a more collective and cultural understanding of public perceptions on radiation risks via a systematic mixed-method research approach. Research in the book also show that while the radiation risk is recognizable and unavoidable, the relevant stakeholders should be more proactive and committed to communicate and rectify the perception of radiation. The book thus serves as a valuable source of reference to understand the debate and to invite more participatory dialogues on radiation risk perceptions among public.

Proceedings of a symposium at the April 1992 meeting. Sections present an overview of radiation and public perception, positive and negative health aspects of nuclear radiation, research on segments of the world population who were exposed to excessive amounts of radioactivity, and research on environmental and occupational radiation exposure. Covers irradiated foods, children in utero during atomic bomb detonations, and health assessment of the Chernobyl accident. Includes a glossary. Annotation copyright by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR

Does radiation medicine need more regulation or simply better-coordinated regulation? This book addresses this and other questions of critical importance to public health and safety. The issues involved are high on the nation's agenda: the impact of radiation on public safety, the balance between federal and state authority, and the cost-benefit ratio of regulation. Although incidents of misadministration are rare, a case in Pennsylvania resulting in the death of a patient and the inadvertent exposure of others to a high dose of radiation drew attention to issues concerning the regulation of ionizing radiation in medicine and the need to examine current regulatory practices. Written at the request from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Radiation in Medicine reviews the regulation of ionizing radiation in medicine, focusing on the NRC's Medical Use Program, which governs the use of reactor-generated byproduct materials. The committee recommends immediate action on enforcement and provides longer term proposals for reform of the regulatory system. The volume covers: Sources of radiation and their use in medicine. Levels of risk to patients, workers, and the public. Current roles of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, other federal agencies, and states. Criticisms from the regulated community. The committee explores alternative regulatory structures for radiation medicine and explains the rationale for the option it recommends in this volume. Based on extensive research, input from the regulated community, and the collaborative efforts of experts from a range of disciplines, Radiation in Medicine will be an important resource for federal and state policymakers and regulators, health professionals involved in radiation treatment, developers and producers of radiation equipment, insurance providers, and concerned laypersons.

We as Health Physicists face what, at many times, appears to be a hopeless task. The task simply stated is informing the public about the risks (or lack thereof) of radiation. Unfortunately, the public has perceived radiation risks to be much greater than they actually are. An example of this problem is shown in a paper by Arthur C. Upton. Three groups of people -- the League of Women Voters, students, and Business and Professional Club members -- were asked to rank 30 sources of risk according to their contribution to the number of deaths in the United States. Not surprisingly, they ranked nuclear power much higher and medical x-rays much lower than the actual values. In addition to the perception problem, we are faced with another hurdle: health physicists as communicators. Members of the Health Physics Society (HPS) found that the communication styles of most health physicists appear to be dissimilar to those of the general public. These authors administered the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator to the HPS Baltimore-Washington Chapter. This test, a standardized test for psychological type developed by Isabel Myers, ask questions that provide a quantitative measure of our natural preferences in four areas. Assume that you as a health physicist have the necessary skills to communicate information about radiation to the public. Health physicists do nothing with these tools. Most people involved in radiation protection do not get involved with public information activies. What I will attempt to do is heighten your interest in such activities. I will share information about public information activities in which I have been involved and give you suggestions for sources of information and materials. 2 refs., 1 tab.

This book is the seventh in a series of titles from the National Research Council that addresses the effects of exposure to low dose LET (Linear Energy Transfer) ionizing radiation and human health. Updating information previously presented in the 1990 publication, Health Effects of Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: BEIR V, this book draws upon new data in both epidemiologic and experimental research. Ionizing radiation arises from both natural and man-made sources and at very high doses can produce damaging effects in human tissue that can be evident within days after exposure. However, it is the low-dose exposures that are the focus of this book. So-called “late” effects, such as cancer, are produced many years after the initial exposure. This book is among the first of its kind to include detailed risk estimates for cancer incidence in addition to cancer mortality. BEIR VII offers a full review of the available biological, biophysical, and epidemiological literature since the last BEIR report on the subject and develops the most up-to-date and comprehensive risk estimates for cancer and other health effects from exposure to low-level ionizing radiation.