RADIATION STANDARDS, INCLUDING FALLOUT 301 Representative Hosmer. Is it a continuous program? Dr. Cuamprriain. Yes. Representative Hosmer. Are they still finding about two-thirds or three-fourths of the equipmentdeficient ? Dr. Cuampertain. My impressionis that they have regularly found the equipment to be improved every time that they have reinspected, but I do not havethe figures. Representative Hosmer. Do you have the figures on the latest inspection ? Dr. CHampertain. No, I do not, sir. Representative Hosmer. In this survey that. you mentioned that was carried on by the American College of Radiology a number of questions were asked relative to the public relations operations of the radiologists, how many speeches they made andarticles they had written and so forth. Were there any questions submitted to them with respect to the equipment and its maintenance, or lack thereof? Dr. Cuampernary. The speeches and such were not public relations things. These were professional education of the medical profession. It had nothing to do with speaking before the lay public. No question was asked in this questionnaire concerning specific items of equipment. A question was asked which was more germane, however—although it was an opinion—as to what they thought of the achievable improvement that had been accomplished in their local area. I would be the first to emphasize that this is an opinion but I don’t know any other way to arrive at this. Representative Hosmer. Let me ask youthis question: In the University of Pennsylvania medical courses on radiological safety, or whatever it is you call them, what standards are suggested to budding M.D.’s with respect to the maintenance of any X-ray or other radiological equipment that they may acquire in their practice? Dr. Crawpertain. You meananoutline of what is taught to them? Representative Hosmer. I want to know what you teach them to do. Specifically with respect to keeping their equipment in good order. Dr. Crramperiarn. I don’t think, as I say, that the equipment ought to be overemphasized in this. We teach our people, however, that they ought to have their equipment inspected by someone who Is qualified in this. Tf they personally become qualified by trainingthisis all right. If not, they ought to get someone who is. We teach themthe features of fluoroseopes and radiographic equipment which are quite the same as the National Committee on Radiation Protection Standards and the college booklet and such all emphasize. But more importantly we try to teach themthe philosophy of howto use radiation with care and with what we hope is wisdom. I think that the equipmentside of this should not be overemphasized. It is only one part of the whole picture. ; Representative Hosmer. I happen to believe that the status of the equipment has been underemphasized. It was so indicated in your previous testimony, and I amtrying to findout if there is any improve- ment that has been made. Specifically, you have stated thus far that you tell your students that they ought to have their equipment in good order and oughtto have it Inspected if they do not become technical experts in the equipment themselves? USARCCEREN adesels,ACRRRESLAEecitt says