Radiobiology and gray science: Flaws in landmark new radiation protections |
| |
Authors: | Email author" target="_blank">Kristin?Shrader-FrechetteEmail author |
| |
Institution: | (1) Department of Philosophy and Department of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, 100 Malloy Hall, 46556 Notre Dame, IN, USA |
| |
Abstract: | The International Commission on Radiological Protection — whose regularly updated recommendations are routinely adopted as
law throughout the globe — recently issued the first-ever ICRP protections for the environment. These draft 2005 proposals
are significant both because they offer the commission’s first radiation protections for any non-human parts of the planet
and because they will influence both the quality of radiation risk assessment and environmental protection, as well as the
global costs of nuclear-weapons cleanup, reactor decommissioning and radioactive waste management. This piece argues that
the 2005 recommendations are scientifically and ethically flawed, or gray, in at least three respects: first, in largely ignoring
scientific journals while employing mainly “gray literature;” second, in relying on non-transparent dose estimates and models,
rather than on actual radiation measurements; and third, in ignoring classical ethical constraints on acceptable radiation
risk. |
| |
Keywords: | abiotic dose ecological risk assessment International Commission on Radiological Protection measurement model public health radiation transparency |
本文献已被 PubMed SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|