Policy decision-making under scientific uncertainty: Radiological risk assessment and the role of expert advisory groups

Health Physics

Volumn 97, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 101-106

  Mossman, Kenneth L ^a  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Low level; National council on radiation protection and measurements; National research council; Radiation; Regulations

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; GOVERNMENT; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH STATUS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION HAZARD; WASTE MANAGEMENT; WORK ENVIRONMENT; WORKPLACE; ADVISORY COMMITTEE; HUMAN; LEGAL ASPECT; MANAGEMENT; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PUBLIC HEALTH; RADIATION AND RADIATION RELATED PHENOMENA; RADIATION PROTECTION; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SCIENCE;

ADVISORY COMMITTEES; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; POLICY MAKING; PUBLIC HEALTH; RADIATION PROTECTION; RADIOLOGIC HEALTH; RISK ASSESSMENT; SCIENCE;

EID: 67651151613     PISSN: 00179078     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/HP.0b013e3181a7abf2     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Atomic Energy Act of 1946. Pub. L. No.79-585. 60 Stat. 755; 1946.
2. Brenner DJ, Raabe OG. Is the linear-no-threshold hypothesis appropriate for use in radiation protection? Radiat Protect Dosim 97:279-285; 2001.
3. Energy Policy Act of 1992. Pub. L. No.102-486. 106 Stat. 3122; 1992.
4. Feinendegen LE, Paretzke H, Neumann RD. Two principal considerations are needed after low doses of ionizing radiation. Radiat Res 169:247-248; 2008.
5. Garrick BJ. Quantifying and controlling catastrophic risks. London: Elsevier Inc.; 2008.
6. Leonard BE. Common sense about the linear no-threshold controversy-give the general public a break. Radiat Res 169:245-246; 2008.
7. Low Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985. Pub. L. No.99-240. 99 Stat. 1842; 1985.
8. Mettler FA, Thomadsen BR, Bhargavan M, Gilley DB, Gray JE, Lipoti JA, McCrohan J, Yoshizumi TT, Mahesh M. Medical radiation exposure in the U.S. in 2006: preliminary results. Health Phys 95:502-507; 2008.
9. Mossman KL. Restructuring nuclear regulations. Environ Health Perspect 111:13-17; 2003.
10. Mossman KL. Radiation risks in perspective. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor and Francis Publishing Group; 2006.
11. Mossman KL. Economic and policy considerations drive the LNT debate. Radiat Res 169:245; 2008.
12. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Evaluation of the linear-nonthreshold dose-response model for ionizing radiation. Bethesda, MD: NCRP; Report No. 136; 2001.
13. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States. Bethesda, MD: NCRP; Report No. 160; 2009.
14. National Research Council. The effects on populations of exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation. BEIR III Report. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1980.
15. National Research Council. Risk assessment in the federal government: managing the process. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1983.
16. National Research Council. Science and judgment in risk assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1994.
17. National Research Council. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII-Phase 2. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2005.
18. National Research Council. Scientific review of the proposed risk assessment bulletin from the Office of Management and Budget. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2007.
19. Pielke Jr. RA. The honest broker: making sense of science in policy and politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007.
20. Tubiana M, Aurengo A, Averbeck D, Bonnin A, Le Guen B, Masse R, Monier R, Valleron AJ, de Vathaire F. Dose effect relationships and the estimation of the carcinogenic effects of low doses of ionizing radiation. Paris: Academie Nationale de Medicine, Institut de France-Academie des Sciences; 2005 [English translation].
21. Tubiana M, Aurengo A, Averbeck D, Masse R. Low dose risk assessment: the debate continues. Radiat Res 169:246-247; 2008.
22. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment. Washington, DC: U.S. EPA; EPA/ 630/P-03/001F; 2005.
23. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Below regulatory concern, Policy statement. Fed Reg 55: 27522; 3 July 1990.
24. Walker JS. Permissible dose: a history of radiation protection in the twentieth century. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 2000.