You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 262 No. 5, August 4, 1989 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Special Communications
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (8)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

The Controversy Over Radiation Safety

A Historical Overview

J. Samuel Walker, PhD

JAMA. 1989;262(5):664-668.


Abstract

The hazards of ionizing radiation have aroused concern since a short time after the discovery of x-rays and natural radioactivity in the 1890s. Misuse of x-rays and radium prompted efforts to encourage radiation safety and to set limits on exposure, culminating in the first recommended "tolerance doses" in 1934. After World War II, the problems of radiation protection became more complex because of the growing number of people subjected to radiation injury and the creation of radioactive elements that had never existed before the achievement of atomic fission. Judging the hazards of radiation became a matter of spirited controversy. Major public debates over the dangers of radioactive fallout from atmospheric bomb testing in the 1950s and early 1960s and the risks of nuclear power generation in later periods focused attention on the uncertainties about the consequences of exposure to low-level radiation and the difficulties of resolving them.

(JAMA. 1989;262:664-668)



Author Affiliations

From the Historian, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.


Footnotes

This article expresses the personal views of the author. It does not represent an official position of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Reprint requests to US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555 (Dr Walker).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Perversions of Medical Technology
Trepman and Albeck
JAMA 1990;263:1066-1066.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1989 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.