DOCSLIB.ORG

Wireless Technology Health Risks Report: Senate Bill

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Wireless Technology Health Risks Report: Senate Bill 2020 Wireless technology health risks report Senate Bill 283 PUBLIC HEALTH DIVISION Acknowledgments Authors Ali Hamade, PhD, DABT Deputy state epidemiologist, Public Health Division Oregon Health Authority Blake Buchalter, MPH Graduate student, Epidemiology Graduate Program Oregon State University Hillary Haskins, MS, MPH Health physicist, Radiation Protection Services Oregon Health Authority Willie Chun Wai Leung, MPH, MS Graduate student, Kinesiology Graduate Program Oregon State University Reviewers André Ourso, JD, MPH Administrator, Center for Health Protection Oregon Health Authority David Howe, MA Section manager, Radiation Protection Services Oregon Health Authority Dean E. Sidelinger, MD, MSEd Health officer and state epidemiologist, Public Health Division Oregon Health Authority Duyen L. Ngo, PhD, MPH Surveillance technical lead, Health Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention Oregon Health Authority Wireless technology health risks report | Acknowledgments 2 Contents » Executive summary ...............................................................................................4 » Background ...........................................................................................................6 » Methods ................................................................................................................8 » Cancer studies ...................................................................................................................8 » Noncancer studies ..............................................................................................................9 » Toxicity ..........................................................................................................................9 » Mental health ...............................................................................................................10 » Sleep ...........................................................................................................................11 » Results ................................................................................................................12 » Cancer endpoints .............................................................................................................12 » Childhood cancer studies .............................................................................................12 » Adult cancer studies.....................................................................................................15 » Summary of cancer endpoints ......................................................................................21 » Noncancer endpoints ........................................................................................................22 » Toxicity ........................................................................................................................22 » Mental health ...............................................................................................................26 » Sleep ...........................................................................................................................28 » Conclusion and discussion ..................................................................................30 » Endnotes .............................................................................................................32 » Appendix .............................................................................................................50 » Table 1. Cancer studies: original research .........................................................................51 » Table 2: Cancer studies: review articles ............................................................................75 » Table 3. Noncancer Toxicity ..............................................................................................82 » Table 4. Mental health ......................................................................................................90 Table 5. Sleep...................................................................................................................94 » Wireless technology health risks report | Contents 3 Executive summary Senate Bill (SB) 283 directs the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) to review studies of the health effects of exposure to microwave radiation. The bill identifies the exposure from the use of wireless network technologies in schools or similar environments as a primary concern. In this report, OHA refers to microwave radiation as radiofrequency radiation or RFR. OHA will report the review results to an interim committee of the Oregon Legislative Assembly related to education not later than Jan. 2, 2021. An OHA team conducted the review. The team was comprised of: • Two graduate student researchers with training in epidemiology, and • Two senior Public Health Division staff members educated and experienced in toxicology and radiation health physics. The review focused on epidemiology studies that examined a relationship between RFR exposure and various endpoints that include: • Cancer or tumor formation • Noncancer toxicity effects • Mental health, and • Sleep. Few studies were available that specifically included children; therefore, OHA included all studies in humans. However, OHA did not include occupational settings due to the high exposure of these settings. Most of the reviewed studies relied on exposure to cell phones or other devices that emit RFR without measuring RFR. OHA identified relevant RFR emissions to be in the frequency range of cell phones and Wi-Fi, or approximately between 1.6 gigahertz (GHz) and 30 GHz. OHA found insufficient evidence to indicate a causal relationship between cell phone exposures and cancer endpoints. Some studies found an association between long-term cell phone use and various brain cancers. However, more studies found no association between long-term use and cancers. There was no consistency among studies. Some studies found an increase in tumor incidence expected after longer exposure than reported in some studies that examined the association between cell phone use and health effects. Further, most studies were not able to measure actual RFR for any one person, and relied on personal recollection of habits, translated into exposure measures. Wireless technology health risks report | Executive summary 4 OHA also reviewed the literature for a potential effect on noncancer endpoints and functions, such as auditory function, cognitive function, nervous system, miscarriage, reproductive system, sleep, and, mental health. Most noncancer studies were similar to studies that examined cancer endpoints in the lack of actual RFR measurement for any one person and relied on personal recollection of habits, translated into exposure measures. Moreover, many studies took a cross-sectional look at a slice of time rather than follow people over time to look at changes. This makes it difficult to draw conclusions about the effects of RFR exposure on health. There was some indication of an effect of RFR on specific brain wave signals. However, not all studies saw this effect. Also, the effect was recorded only in studies where a cell phone was held next to the head for some time. There were also reported effects on reproductive endpoints. However, these studies were not consistent in their findings and were unable to account for many potential confounders. For example, longer use of phones associated with increased sperm abnormalities in men might be a result of long periods of sitting down or running a laptop in contact with the body, rather than RFR from the phone or a Wi-Fi router. OHA noticed a variety of effects among studies looking at health outcomes associated with phone use and screen time (this includes TV, laptops, etc.). There is good evidence to suggest that screen and phone time are associated with poorer mental health indicators and sleep. The exact attributes associated with the use of these devices (RFR exposure, content, etc.) need to be explored further in long term follow-up studies, in-depth health assessments, double-blind studies, and RFR exposure assessments. It is important to reiterate that even though SB 283 directed OHA to concentrate on the review of health effects in school or similar environments, most of the studies available for review were largely unrelated to school settings. That said, OHA included studies that overlap those expected in a school setting with many estimating higher exposures. Overall, the available epidemiology research examining RFR health effects does not provide sufficient evidence to conclude that RFR exposure in school settings is associated with adverse health effects. However, as mentioned above, more research is needed. This is in line with conclusions on RFR exposures and health by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Cancer Institute and other agencies that work to protect population health. Wireless technology health risks report | Executive summary 5 Background Senate Bill 283 (SB 283) directs the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) to evaluate peer- reviewed, independently-funded scientific studies of the health effects of exposure to microwave radiation. Of primary concern is the use of wireless network technologies in schools or similar environments and potential health effects in children. SB 283 also directs OHA to report the results of the review to an interim committee of the Legislative Assembly related to education by Jan.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Committee Reports 2005 Midyear Meeting
    2004-2005 MIDYEAR REPORT Academic Education Committee Health Physics Society Mark Rudin - Chair Report Prepared by Mark J. Rudin, Ph.D. January 11, 2005 Abstract The Academic Education Committee (AEC) has been and continues to be very active in a number of areas. Accomplishments/activities during the first half of the 2004-2005 time period included: 1. Administration of Health Physics Society (HPS) Fellowship and Travel Grant Awards 2. Maintenance of Student Branch Programs 3. A fifth health physics program participated in the Applied Science Accreditation Commission (ASAC) of the American Board for Engineering and Technology, Inc. (ABET) accreditation process. Page 220 Report Outline: I. Recommendations for Action II. Subcommittee Assignments for 2004-2005 III. Progress Reports 2003-2004 HPS Fellow Selections 2003-2004 Student Travel Grants Student Branch Program Health Physics Education Reference Book Health Physics Program Directors Organization Accreditation Sub-Committee Revision of the Careers in Health Physics brochure I. Recommendations for Action 1. The Committee anxiously awaits the approval of its Rules/Operating Procedures. Once the rules are approved, the AEC will be able to appoint individuals from the AEC Subcommittee on Accreditation to the ANS and the American Academy of Health Physics. John Poston and Rich Brey have agreed to serve as the liasions for the ANS and Academy, respectively. 2. Chuck Roessler has graciously served as the HPS Commissioner on the Applied Sciences Accreditation Commission (ASAC) of ABET for two terms (2003-04 and 2004-05). Note that ASAC is the ABET commission under which accreditation of Health Physics Academic Programs is conducted. Commissioner terms are for one year with members eligible for reappointment for up to five terms.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of Applied Research and Technology
    Journal of Applied Research and Technology www.jart.icat.unam.mx Journal of Applied Research and Technology 18 (2020) 269-278 Original Impacts of RF radiation from mobile phones on human health and its remedies Vijayalakshmi L.* Nirmala Devi P. Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Kongu Engineering College, Perundurai, Erode - 638060 Received 12 14 2019; accepted 09 29 2020 Available online 10 31 2020 Abstract: The mobile phone is one of the most unavoidable electronic gadgets in our day-to-day life. As all devices are fully automated through the Internet of Things (IoT), a mobile phone help us controlling and connecting with other devices. In spite of many advantages of the use of mobile phones in the field of communication automation, the RF radiation from mobile phones or towers is causing many health issues. The main drawback of this effect is not known initially but the effect becomes adverse after a long period. This paper lists the impact of mobile phones both on the positive and negative side. Further research is done to avoid the RF exposure in the field of communication and absorbing material to reduce the impact. As the effect of prolonged use of mobile phones is known only after long time, the general suggestions on their use are listed to avoid deadly diseases and other psychological effects. Keywords: SAR (specific absorption rate), IoT (Internet of Things), RF (radio frequency) ∗Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected](Vijayalakshmi L.). Peer Review under the responsibility of Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jart.2017.02.005 1665-6423/© 2017 Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Instituto de Ciencias Aplicadas y Tecnología.
    [Show full text]
  • Radiation Risk in Perspective
    PS010-1 RADIATION RISK IN PERSPECTIVE POSITION STATEMENT OF THE HEALTH HEALTH PHYSICS SOCIETY* PHYSICS SOCIETY Adopted: January 1996 Revised: August 2004 Contact: Richard J. Burk, Jr. Executive Secretary Health Physics Society Telephone: 703-790-1745 Fax: 703-790-2672 Email: [email protected] http://www.hps.org In accordance with current knowledge of radiation health risks, the Health Physics Society recommends against quantitative estimation of health risks below an individual dose of 5 rem1 in one year or a lifetime dose of 10 rem above that received from natural sources. Doses from natural background radiation in the United States average about 0.3 rem per year. A dose of 5 rem will be accumulated in the first 17 years of life and about 25 rem in a lifetime of 80 years. Estimation of health risk associated with radiation doses that are of similar magnitude as those received from natural sources should be strictly qualitative and encompass a range of hypothetical health outcomes, including the possibility of no adverse health effects at such low levels. There is substantial and convincing scientific evidence for health risks following high-dose exposures. However, below 5–10 rem (which includes occupational and environmental exposures), risks of health effects are either too small to be observed or are nonexistent. In part because of the insurmountable intrinsic and methodological difficulties in determining if the health effects that are demonstrated at high radiation doses are also present at low doses, current radiation protection standards and practices are based on the premise that any radiation dose, no matter how small, may result in detrimental health effects, such as cancer and hereditary genetic damage.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Effects of Mobile Phone Use – an Overview –
    Strahlenschutzkommission Geschäftsstelle der Strahlenschutzkommission Postfach 12 06 29 D-53048 Bonn http://www.ssk.de Biological Effects of Mobile Phone Use – An Overview – Statement by the German Commission on Radiological Protection Adopted at the 250th meeting of the Commission on Radiological Protection on 29/30 September 2011 Biological Effects of Mobile Phone Use 2 Table of contents Introduction ...................................................................................................... 3 1 DMF projects completed since 2008 ....................................................... 3 1.1 Thematic area: Biology ................................................................................. 4 1.1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................... 4 1.1.2 Electrosensitivity ................................................................................... 4 1.1.3 Sleep quality.......................................................................................... 5 1.1.4 Blood-brain barrier ................................................................................ 5 1.1.5 Cognitive functions ................................................................................ 6 1.1.6 Long-term exposure of laboratory animals: metabolism, reproductive behaviour, immune response and stress response ............................... 6 1.1.7 Genotoxicity and gene regulation .......................................................... 7 1.1.8 Age-dependent effects of high-frequency
    [Show full text]
  • Recommendations for the Follow-Up Assessment of Contaminated Travelers by Radiation Control Health Physics Staff
    Recommendations for the Follow-Up Assessment of Contaminated Travelers by Radiation Control Health Physics Staff State radiation control program health physicists will perform the follow-up assessment of contaminated travelers in coordination with the local or state health department. This assessment may be done at the state radiation control program office, the traveler’s place of residence, or other locations as convenient. This screening process may be stressful for travelers. The health physics staff should consider requesting assistance from behavioral health professionals or risk communicators to help reduce anxiety for travelers throughout the process. The follow-up assessment should consist of four main activities: 1) Ensure the effectiveness of external decontamination 2) Assist in completion and review the Epidemiologic Assessment form with the traveler and assess potential for internal contamination 3) Perform a thyroid count 4) Evaluate the need for bioassay, and collect a urine sample if necessary Based on current environmental monitoring results reported from Japan, it is highly unlikely for any external or internal contamination to present a public health concern for people outside of the 50-mile (80-kilometer) radius around the Fukushima nuclear power plant. 1) Ensure the effectiveness of external decontamination Travelers identified as being contaminated with radioactive materials by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) are offered an opportunity – at the airport – to change into clean clothes and wash exposed skin surfaces, such as their hands and face. Additional washing (such as a full shower) may be necessary to remove all traces of external contamination. The effectiveness of external decontamination performed by the traveler at the airport or at home can be verified using a beta/gamma radiation detection instrument such as a Geiger Muller (GM) pancake probe or equivalent.
    [Show full text]
  • Shieldalloy Metallurgical Corporation, Ltr Dtd 01/25/1993 Re: Application for Amendment of USNRC Source Material License
    i S H I E L DA L LOY M ETA L LU R G I CA L C 0 R P0 RAT I 0 N WEST BOULEVARD P 0 BOX 768 NEWFIELD, NJ 08344 TELEPHONE (609) 692-4200 TWX (510) 687-8918 FAX (609) 692-4017 ENVIRONMENTAL DEPARTMENT FAX Certified Mail: P 284 355 015 (609) 697-9025 Return Receipt Requested January 25, 1993 Mr. Yawar H. Faraz Mail Stop 6H-3 Advanced Fuel & Special Facilities Section Fuel Cycle Safety Branch Division of Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 RE: Application for Amendment of USNRC Source Material License Number SMB-743, Docket No. 40-7102 Dear Mr. Faraz: As recommended in your letter of December 15, 1992, Shieldalloy Metallurgical Corporation (SMC) is requesting amendment of Condition 12 of Source Material License Number SMB-743 to reflect the following administrative changes in its radiation protection program: 1. Overall control and authority for radiological protection at SMC shall rest with the Senior Vice President of Manufacturing, Mr. Richard D. Way. 2. The Radiation Safety Officer for SMC is Mr. Craig R. Rieman. A copy of Mr. Rieman s resume is attached. 3. The Assistant Radiation Safety Officer (ARSO) is Mr. James P. Valenti. A copy of Mr. Valenti I s resume is attached. 9305030276 530125 PDR ADOCK 04007102 C PDR Mr. Yawar H. Faraz U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission January 25, 1993 Page 2 4. In addition, Authorized Users for SMC are: David R. Smith Bill Grabus Knud Clausen Brian Martin AI Lashley Richard Bodine Robert A.
    [Show full text]
  • Electrical Safety Policy and Manual
    ELECTRICAL SAFETY POLICY AND MANUAL ELECTRICAL SAFETY POLICY IX. HIGH-VOLTAGE PLATFORMS ELECTRICAL SAFETY COMMITTEE CHARTER X. CAPACITORS ELECTRICAL SAFETY MANUAL XI. HAZARDOUS GASES AND LIQUIDS I. NATIONAL AND LOCAL STANDARDS XII. MAGNETS AND INDUCTORS • Permanent Installations 1. Fringe Fields • Temporary Experimental 2. Warning Signs Installations 3. Discharge 4. Connections II. SUPPLEMENTARY STANDARDS 5. Eddy Currents 6. Cooling III. POWER AND DISTRIBUTION 7. Construction CIRCUIT • Outlets and Power Supply XIII. ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION Output 8. Warning • Conductors 9. Monitoring • Circuits 10. Protection IV. SYSTEM NEUTRAL XIV. LASERS V. EQUIPMENT GROUNDING XV. WORKING ON ENERGIZED CIRCUITS VI. EXPOSED LIVE PARTS XVI. LOCKOUT/TAGOUT VII. ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT XVII. TABLES PROTECTIVE MEASURES • Up to 600 V and Over 20 A • Over 600 V and 0.025 A or Stored Energy of 10 J VIII. OPERATIONS • General • Portable Electrical Equipment Electrical Safety Policy In keeping with the Physics Division Policy to give the highest priority to Environmental, Health, and Safety concerns in its operations, it is the intent of Physics Division management to prevent electrical hazards to staff and visitors and to assure adherence to applicable electrical safety codes. This will be accomplished through the development of operational procedures, the proper training of personnel, the design of equipment, and the establishment of an Electrical Safety Committee. ELECTRICAL SAFETY COMMITTEE CHARTER Responsibilities and Functions • Develop and revise as needed the Physics Division Electrical Safety Policy and Manual. • Annually review Lock-out/Tag-out log books. • Identify unsafe conditions and/or practices and assist in the development of remedial action plans. • Review electrical incidents, near-misses, and formulate preventive measures.
    [Show full text]
  • Radiation and Risk: Expert Perspectives Radiation and Risk: Expert Perspectives SP001-1
    Radiation and Risk: Expert Perspectives Radiation and Risk: Expert Perspectives SP001-1 Published by Health Physics Society 1313 Dolley Madison Blvd. Suite 402 McLean, VA 22101 Disclaimer Statements and opinions expressed in publications of the Health Physics Society or in presentations given during its regular meetings are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the Health Physics Society, the editors, or the organizations with which the authors are affiliated. The editor(s), publisher, and Society disclaim any responsibility or liability for such material and do not guarantee, warrant, or endorse any product or service mentioned. Official positions of the Society are established only by its Board of Directors. Copyright © 2017 by the Health Physics Society All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form, in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without prior written permission of the publisher. Printed in the United States of America SP001-1, revised 2017 Radiation and Risk: Expert Perspectives Table of Contents Foreword……………………………………………………………………………………………………………... 2 A Primer on Ionizing Radiation……………………………………………………………………………... 6 Growing Importance of Nuclear Technology in Medicine……………………………………….. 16 Distinguishing Risk: Use and Overuse of Radiation in Medicine………………………………. 22 Nuclear Energy: The Environmental Context…………………………………………………………. 27 Nuclear Power in the United States: Safety, Emergency Response Planning, and Continuous Learning…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 33 Radiation Risk: Used Nuclear Fuel and Radioactive Waste Disposal………………………... 42 Radiation Risk: Communicating to the Public………………………………………………………… 45 After Fukushima: Implications for Public Policy and Communications……………………. 51 Appendix 1: Radiation Units and Measurements……………………………………………………. 57 Appendix 2: Half-Life of Some Radionuclides…………………………………………………………. 58 Bernard L.
    [Show full text]
  • ANL Physics Division ELECTRICAL SAFETY POLICY and MANUAL
    ANL Physics Division ELECTRICAL SAFETY POLICY AND MANUAL 2007 ELECTRICAL SAFETY POLICY VII. ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT PROTECTIVE MEASURES ELECTRICAL SAFETY COMMITTEE A. Up to 600 V and Over 20 A CHARTER B. Over 600 V and 0.025 A or Stored Energy of 10 J ELECTRICAL SAFETY MANUAL VIII. OPERATIONS I. NATIONAL AND LOCAL STANDARDS A. General A. Permanent Installations B. Portable Electrical Equipment B. Temporary Experimental Installations II. SUPPLEMENTARY STANDARDS IX. HIGH-VOLTAGE PLATFORMS III. POWER AND DISTRIBUTION CIRCUIT X. CAPACITORS A. Outlets and Power Supply Output XI. HAZARDOUS GASES AND LIQUIDS B. Conductors C. Circuits XII. MAGNETS AND INDUCTORS A. Fringe Fields IV. SYSTEM NEUTRAL B. Warning Signs C. Discharge V. EQUIPMENT GROUNDING D. Connections E. Eddy Currents F. Cooling VI. EXPOSED LIVE PARTS G. Construction XIII. ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION A. Warning XVI. TABLES B. Monitoring C. Protection XIV. WORKING ON ENERGIZED CIRCUITS XV. LOCKOUT/TAGOUT The official version of this Physics Division manual is found at www.phy.anl.gov/div/esh. This paper copy may be obsolete soon after it is printed. Call Tom Mullen with any content questions. Electrical Safety Policy In keeping with the Physics Division Policy to give the highest priority to Environmental, Health, and Safety concerns in its operations, it is the intent of Physics Division management to prevent electrical hazards to staff and visitors and to assure adherence to applicable electrical safety codes. This will be accomplished through the development of operational procedures, the proper training of personnel, the design of equipment, and the establishment of an Electrical Safety Committee. ELECTRICAL SAFETY COMMITTEE CHARTER Authorization The Physics Division Electrical Safety Committee is authorized by and reports to the Director of the Physics Division.
    [Show full text]
  • RF Exposure Requirements and Limits and Warnings
    RF Exposure Requirements and Limits and Warnings Contents RF Exposure Requirements and Limits and Warnings .................................................................................. 1 Radio Frequency Exposure ........................................................................................................................ 1 FCC Requirements for Operation in the United States ................................................................................. 2 FCC RF Radiation Exposure and SAR Statements ...................................................................................... 2 FCC Guidelines for SAR Compliance and Warning ................................................................................ 2 FCC Guidelines for Human Exposure .................................................................................................... 2 Canada Radiation Exposure Statements / Exposition Humaine aux RF .............................................. 3 ISED RSS-102 SAR Compliance and Warning / CNR-102-avertissements ............................................. 3 ISED RSS-102 RF Exposure Compliance and Warning / Déclaration d'exposition aux RF ..................... 4 Europe RF Radiation Exposure and SAR Statements ................................................................................ 5 EU SAR Compliance and Warning: ........................................................................................................ 5 EU RF Exposure Compliance and Warning ...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Health Physics Education Reference Book
    HEALTH PHYSICS EDUCATION REFERENCE BOOK 2010 - 2011 Health Physics Society Academic Education Committee Updated June 2010 1. Bloomsburg University Pennsylvania BS 2. Clemson University South Carolina MS PhD 3. Colorado State University Colorado MS PhD 4. Duke University North Carolina MS PhD 5. Francis Marion University South Carolina BS 6. Idaho State University Idaho AA BS MS PhD 7. Illinois Institute of Technology Illinois MS 8. Linn State Technical College Missouri AA 9. Louisiana State University Louisiana MS PhD 10. Ohio State University Ohio MS PhD 11. Oregon State University Oregon BS MS PhD 12. Purdue University Indiana BS MS PhD 13. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute New York BS MS PhD 14. San Diego State University California MS 15. Texas A&M University Texas BS MS PhD 16. Texas State Technical College Texas AA 17. Thomas Edison State College AS BS 18. University of Cincinnati Ohio MS PhD 19. University of Florida Florida BS MS PhD 20. University of Massachusetts Lowell Massachusetts BS MS PhD 21. University of Michigan Michigan BS MS PhD 22. University of Missouri-Columbia Missouri MS PhD 23. University of Nevada Las Vegas Nevada BS MS 24. University of Tennessee Tennessee BS MS PhD 25. Vanderbilt University Tennessee MS PhD 26. Virginia Commonwealth University Degree Programs Recognized by the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) in Health Physics under ABET’s Applied Science Accreditation Commission (ASAC) Bloomsburg University Health Physics (BS) (2006) Clemson University Environmental Health Physics (MS) (2005) Colorado State University Health Physics (MS) (2007) Idaho State University Health Physics (BS) (2003) Idaho State University Health Physics (MS) (2003) Oregon State University Radiation (2004) University of Nevada Las Vegas Health Physics (MS) (2003) Degree Programs Recognized by the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) in Radiological Engineering under ABET’s Engineering Accreditation Commission (EAC) Texas A&M University Radiological Health Engineering (BS) (1987) 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Prospectus of the Health Physics Society
    THE HEALTH PHYSICS SOCIETY An Affiliate of the International Radiation Protection Association PROSPECTUS The HEALTH PHYSICS SOCIETY is a professional organization whose mission is excellence in the science and practice of radiation safety. Society activities include encouraging research in radiation science, developing standards, and disseminating radiation safety information. Society members are involved in understanding, evaluating, and controlling the potential risks from radiation relative to the benefits. Our vision is that the Health Physics Society will be the home for radiation safety specialists and the trusted source of radiation safety information that enables the safe use of radiation to improve people's lives. The activities of the Society are those appropriate to the accomplishment of the mission, including (1) promoting cooperation and communication among people engaged in radiation protection activities within particular geographical, functional, and technical areas through chapters and sections, (2) providing for the dissemination and exchange of information through scientific and professional meetings, education, and publications, (3) encouraging scientific, professional, and public education, (4) promoting scientific research, (5) encouraging and supporting the development and use of radiation protection standards and recommendations, and (6) pursuing other activities appropriate to radiation safety. The Society is the largest radiation protection society in the world, with members in 48 countries, and has established nearly 40 chapters in the United States, 2 chapters in non-US countries, 16 student branches, and 10 technical sections. The membership of the Society is divided into two general subdivisions—Voting Members and Nonvoting Members. Voting members are entitled to hold office in the Society. Dues are set each year by the Board of Directors.
    [Show full text]