Talk:Radiation protection
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The reference to Cresson Kearney's work is authoritative and supports the content. I'm removing the "lacks references" label Ray Van De Walker 08:24, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the debate was PAGE MOVED per request. -GTBacchus(talk) 08:49, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Requested move
Ionising radiation protection → Radiation protection – Radiation protection is currently a redirect to ionising radiation protection, but radiation protection involves more than just ionizing radiation. For example, there is protection against the low energy (visible light and below) electromagnetic radiation emitted by things like power lines, microwaves and cell phones. Instead of starting a separate article at radiation protection, I think that the article should be moved and expanded to cover both. Also, moving it gets rid of the United States/Commonwealth spelling difference - ionizing versus ionising, which is more pronounced than it would be otherwise because the ionizing radiation article uses the U.S. spelling. -- Kjkolb 13:26, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Survey
Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
- Support; I'm not wholly familiar with the article subject, but your reasoning is quite sound. -Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 01:23, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Discussion
Add any additional comments
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
[edit] Merge ALARA to Radiation protection
ALARA is more than just a catchphrase ( although some countries do use it as such) - it is a fundamental principal of radiation protection as determined by the ICRP. As such it warrants a separate heading. The concept of alara is all about control and considering options for reducing exposures. At one level it can be application of cost benefit analysis or at the operational level it can be talking through alternatives. The aim overall is to keep doses as low as reasonably achievable because the basic tenet of radiation protection is that there is no safe exposure level and therefore each exposure, no matter how small has an associated risk. There is a view that there is a threshold but this is not internationally accepted. Anderson. Sept 2007 ALARA is just a catchphrase used in the context of radiation protection, so I proposed a merge.--Yannick 13:55, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
I respectfully disagree. I think it's a term from safety engineering, especially in any medical context where quanitification of the risks is impractical. Ray Van De Walker 08:28, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
There is also the related concept of ALARP - as low as reasonably practicable. This has its own article and it might be more appropriate to merge these two topics so that a differential appreciation might be made, with links back to Radiation Protection, Safety Engineering, Risk Analysis etc.
Soarhead77 10:39, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
The use of time, distance, and shielding contribute directly to keeping radiation doses ALARA. I think ALARA need only be defined in this section.
Th'wing 20:19, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
ARALA is also used in the Diagnostic Ultrasound field and ultrasound is not generally thought of as employing radiation. In my opinion, this would argue against the move. Lgrove 15:13, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Although the page as it now exists is focused on radiation protection, ALARA is a broader regulatory concept that is applied to many risk-related technologies - notably food safety. A better plan may be to expand the scope of the ALARA page, and maintain its independence - though I'm not qualified to do so. Dbushey 19:41, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

