首页> 外文期刊>Science and engineering ethics >Radiobiology and gray science: Flaws in landmark new radiation protections
【24h】

Radiobiology and gray science: Flaws in landmark new radiation protections

机译:放射生物学和灰色科学:划时代的新型放射防护中的缺陷

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

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.
机译:国际放射防护委员会(其定期更新的建议在全球范围内通常作为法律被采用)最近发布了有史以来第一份针对环境的ICRP防护。 2005年的这些建议草案意义重大,既因为它们为委员会的任何非人类部分提供了委员会的首个辐射防护,又因为它们将影响辐射风险评估和环境保护的质量以及核武器的全球成本。清理,反应堆退役和放射性废物管理。本文认为,在至少三个方面,2005年的建议在科学和道德上存在缺陷,或者说是灰色的:首先,在主要使用“灰色文学”的同时,很大程度上忽略了科学期刊。第二,依靠非透明的剂量估计和模型,而不是实际的辐射测量;第三,忽略对可接受的辐射风险的传统伦理约束。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号