UNASSIGNED: Airborne ultrasound is used for various purposes both in industrial and public settings, as well as being produced as a by-product by a range of sources. The International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA) published interim guidelines on limiting human exposure to airborne ultrasound in 1984, based on the limited scientific evidence that was available at that time. In order to investigate whether research since 1984 requires the development of revised exposure guidelines we considered (a) within the context of ultrasound exposure the relevance to health of the biological endpoints/mechanisms listed in the IRPA guidelines, (b) the validity of the exposure limits, and (c) whether there are biological endpoints/mechanisms not covered in the guidelines. The analysis of the available evidence showed that the biological endpoints that form the basis of the guidelines are relevant to health and the guidelines provide limits of exposure based on the evidence that was available at the time. However, the IRPA limits and their associated dosimetry were based on limited evidence, which may not be considered as scientifically substantiated. Further, there is no substantiated evidence of biological endpoints/mechanisms not covered by the IRPA guidelines. These two observations could mean that IRPA\'s limits are too low or too high. Research since the IRPA guidelines has made some improvements in the knowledge base, but there are still significant data gaps that need to be resolved before a formal revision of the guidelines can be made by ICNIRP, including research needs related to health outcomes and improved dosimetry. This statement makes a number of recommendations for future research on airborne ultrasound.

A worldwide overview and analysis for the existing limits of human exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields (RF-EMF) is given in this paper. These reference levels have been established by different national and even regional governments, which can be based on the guidelines provided by the recommendations of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), the International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), and even in the United States of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), as well as, are based on the so-called precautionary principle. Explicit reference is made to the exposure limits adopted in countries or regions, such as Canada, Italy, Poland, Switzerland, China, Russia, France, and regions of Belgium (Brussels, Flanders, Wallonia), where the limits are much lower than the international standards. The limits are compared to a selected set of in-situ measurements. This clearly shows that the measured values are typically very small compared to the international standards but could be somewhat higher compared to the reduced limits. Based on this observation and the reasonable assumption that the sensitivity of people to Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) is the same everywhere (whole-body), we propose the idea to establish a worldwide reference limit for the general public, thus applicable in all countries, if the ICNIRP considers it appropriate. Research must continue to generate measurement data that demonstrate the levels of exposure to which we are really exposed, and with this, provide arguments to the organizations that established the guidelines, especially the ICNIRP, to evaluate whether the current limits are too much. High and can be modified when considered pertinent. To the best of our knowledge, at no time has the reference level for the general public been exceeded.

To explore the data and supporting evidence for the 2019 statement by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) that recommends limits to the routine use of fetal and gonadal shielding in medical imaging.
Three researchers searched 5 online databases, selecting articles from scholarly journals and radiology trade publications. Search results were filtered to include literature published from January 1, 2016, to August 9, 2022, to ensure relevance and provide historical background for the 2019 AAPM statement.
The use of patient shielding during medical imaging did not reduce dose, and in certain instances, increased dose received by patients during computed tomography, fluoroscopy, or dental imaging. The use of shielding interfered with technology designed to reduce patient dose, including automatic exposure control and dose modulation. Research showed that errors in shield placement were common and that shields can act as sources of infection or carriers of harmful lead dust.
In each article reviewed, a compelling case was made for discontinuing routine patient shielding during radiographic procedures. Serious opposition to the discontinuation of the shielding practice was not found. Opportunities exist for further study into technologists\' and the public\'s understanding of the effects of radiation and technologists\' compliance with new shielding policies.
The challenges with properly using shielding, paired with recent technological advancements and a new understanding of radiation protection, have negated the need for contact shielding. This legacy practice can be discontinued in clinical settings, and educational materials for technologists and students should be updated to reflect these changes.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

Using the Fukushima accident experience, this letter discusses recent efforts on measuring scientific consensus views-that is, quantifying the agreement among scientists. In the field of radiological protection, the efforts to measure scientific consensus views deserve attention, because hoaxes have been spreading even after the Fukushima nuclear accident. We discussed two points. First, the visualization of the diversity of scientific opinions shatters the diversity illusion caused by the mass media\'s irresponsible dissemination of pro and con arguments. Second, the use of scientific consensus views without an ethical code is dangerous. Measuring scientific consensus views should be accompanied with the development of ethical guidelines on using it.

This document provides the new EANM guideline on radioiodine therapy of benign thyroid disease. Its aim is to guide nuclear medicine physicians, endocrinologists, and practitioners in the selection of patients for radioiodine therapy. Its recommendations on patients\' preparation, empiric and dosimetric therapeutic approaches, applied radioiodine activity, radiation protection requirements, and patients follow-up after administration of radioiodine therapy are extensively discussed.

Due to the legal regulations radiation incidents in nuclear or medical/industrial facilities are rare events. Radiation incidents are much more common in the context of road traffic accidents when sources of radiation are being transported. The handling of radiation victims is accompanied by strong feelings of fear and anxiety due to the rarity of such events and the physical characteristics of radioactive irradiation. This cannot be detected by human senses and the effects are not immediately visible. The risk and threat of radiation for rescue personnel and in hospitals can be overcome by a solid basic knowledge and by following some simple rules. This continuing medical education article imparts the necessary principles and based on an algorithm demonstrates the safe approach at the scene of the accident and the handling and transfer of the patient to the hospital. Moreover, it highlights further services and support by regional radiation protection centers.
Strahlenunfälle in kerntechnischen oder medizinischen/industriellen Anlagen sind aufgrund der gesetzlichen Vorschriften selten. Häufiger kommen Unfälle mit Strahlenquellen im Rahmen des Transports auf der Straße vor. Der Umgang mit Strahlenverunfallten ist mit großen Ressentiments belegt. Dies liegt einerseits an der Seltenheit der Ereignisse, andererseits an den physikalischen Eigenschaften der radioaktiven Strahlung: Diese ist mit den menschlichen Sinnen nicht erfassbar, und ihre Auswirkungen sind nicht unmittelbar sichtbar. Das Strahlenrisiko für Einsatzkräfte und im Krankenhaus ist durch ein solides Basiswissen und das Beachten einiger einfachen Regeln beherrschbar. Dieser Weiterbildungsbeitrag vermittelt die erforderlichen Grundlagen und zeigt anhand eines Algorithmus das sichere Vorgehen an der Einsatzstelle und die Übergabe des Patienten im Krankenhaus auf. Darüber hinaus informiert er über weitergehende Hilfsangebote und Unterstützung durch die regionalen Strahlenschutzzentren.

The current global roll-out of 5G infrastructure is designed to utilise millimetre wave frequencies (30-300 GHz range) at data transmission rates in the order of gigabits per second (Gbps). This frequency band will be transmitted using beamforming, a new introduction in near-field exposures. The International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) has recently updated their guidelines. We briefly examine whether the new approach of the ICNIRP is satisfactory to prevent heat damage and other adverse bio-effects once millimetre wave 5G is included, and we challenge the use of surface-only exposure assessment for local exposures greater than 6 GHz in part due to possible Brillouin precursor pulse formation. However, this is relevant whether or not Brillouin precursors occur from absorption of either 5G or future G transmissions. Many significant sources conclude there is insufficient research to assure safety even from the heat perspective. To date, there has been no published in vivo, in vitro or epidemiological research using exposures to 5G New Radio beam-formed signals.

International Space Station partner nations have yet to agree on career radiation dose constraints. This is of increasing concern for collaborative mission planning beyond low-Earth orbit, since it is likely that one or two long-duration missions will expose crew to a cumulative dose that approaches or exceeds their current respective limits. As with radiological effects, the cumulative health impact of the numerous other injuries and illnesses documented during spaceflight is inherently heightened with longer and farther missions, say to the Moon and Mars. This paper summarizes the origin of existing radiological constraints employed by the Canadian Space Agency and explores how to build upon these protection practices to address the challenges associated with beyond low-Earth orbit missions. The discussion then leads into a review of conventional risk metrics currently under evaluation by space-faring nations to quantify risk of radiation-induced cancer mortality. This paper concludes with a proposal for the application of an existing burden of disease model termed the Disability Adjusted Life Year, to space exploration. This model can accommodate the many health hazards of spaceflight, including ionizing radiation, on a common scale. It has the potential to serve as an intuitive communication tool for informing on the impact of spaceflight on crew health.