. : Taya tN aTyrg7Qe 290 ORES. . RADIATION STANDARDS, INCLUDING FALLOUT All of the potential somatic effects of radiation, at dosage levels involved in diagnostic radiology, require long latent time periods. In patients who will not survive for a sufficiently long time for the effects to become manifest there is noreal hazard and their exposuresare not significant. All studies of radiation exposures have emphasized that, whatever the dosage: figures may be, there is room for improvement by reduction of exposure required. for the procedures that are being done and also in the choice of procedures. It is also evident that the means to accomplish significant improvement are at hand.. This brings us to the second major consideration: 2. CONTROL AND IMPROVEMENT MEASURES : (a) Hducational measures Physicians and dentists are confronted with a great variety of factors which: must influence each decision in regard to each patient. The judgment which: balances possible radiation hazards against vital information or other benefit to: be obtained must be an educated one which gives proper weight to each relevant factor. Many of the most important technical factors in dosage reduction also depend on highly skilled application of intelligence rather than inherent characteristics of radiation apparatus. In this light, by far the most important technique for medical radiaton control and reduction is educational. The American College of Radiology has been very active in this field, both in its own program and in the encouragement of such programs by medical societies, other specialist groups, and professional journals. During March and April of this year, polls were conducted by the American College of Radiology to determine the amount of emphasis now given to the problem of radiation safety, protection, and control, as compared with that of: 5 years ago. Information was solicited from three groups of people: (1) The 4,966 active members and fellows of the college who are diplomates of the American Board of Radiclogy. (2) Fifty-four State and regional medical societies. (3) Eighty-seven approved medical schools in the United States. In every group, the educational effort expended in the area of radiation protection has shown a measurably high increase. The 4,966 practicing radiologists were asked to estimate the number of talks, speeches, and programs on radiation safety and control they have taken part in . in the last 5 years; the numberof such programs they know to have been given in their area in the same period ; the number of papers, editorials, or exhibits they have prepared on radiation protection during this time; and a percentage esti- mate of the extent of attainable improvement in medical radiation protection measures that have occurred in their area in the last 5 years. <A total of 49.4 percent replied to the questionnaire. The final results of the survey are given in table A in the appendix to this paper. It is worthwhile noting that since 1957, some 14,898 talks, speeches, programs, papers, editorials, and exhibits have been presented by these responding radiologists. Of those responding, 46 percent estimated that there had been a 50 percent or better improvement in medical radiation protection measures. Only 3.4 percent indicated no improvement. The second group surveyed was 54 State and regional medical societies. There were 25 responses. Each of these societies publishes an official journal, and the respondents indicated a total of 196,825 subscribers. These subscribers comprise 88.8 percent of the total number of: physicians in the United States. Within the past 5 years, the medical societies responding to the questionnaire have published 218 articles on radiation safety, control, or protection, have sponsored 166 speeches and programs at their meetings, and have presented 119 exhibits and moticn pictures dealing with education in radiation safety. The majority of these societies show a 50- to 75-percent increase in the educational emphasis on radiation safety in the last 5 years. Every society responding has a committee on disaster plauning to deal with problems inherent in atomic disasters, military or otherwise. With one exception, they have all indicated thev are reasonably to very active in National, State, or local disaster planning efforts. The full figures on this poll are given in table B in the appendix. The 87 medical schools surveyed were asked to estimate the hours of instruction in radiation safety, protection, and control given to medical students and others. They were also questioned as to the type of visual aids employed in this instruction, and the percentage of increase or decrease in hours devoted to such instruction now, as compared with 5 yeurs ugo. Of the 78 respondents, re vspd tasatovelbacgusdtpcedesbtenshee Wieveseia tay atlatetan’ (AUR iosistbeespabheeune es aa on Bs