References
- Huff J. Industry influence on occupational and environmental public health. Int J Occup Environ Health. 2007; 13: 107–17.
- Egilman D, Howe S. Against anti-health epidemiology: corpo-rate obstruction of public health via manipulation of epidemi-ology. Int J Occup Environ Health. 2007; 13: 118–24.
- Wasserman H, Solomon N. Killing Our Own: The Disaster of America's Experience with Atomic Radiation. New York: Dell, 1982.
- Bertell R. No Immediate Danger? Prognosis for a Radioactive Earth. Toronto, ON, Canada: Women's Educational Press, 1985.
- Caufield C. Multiple Exposures: Chronicles of the Radiation Age. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1989.
- Takahashi Y. Hiroshima. Lancet. 2005; 366: 1434. http://download.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/0140-6736/piis0140673605675952.pdf.
- Nussbaum RH, Köhnlein W. Inconsistencies and open ques-tions regarding low-dose health effects of ionizing radiation. Environ Health Perspect. 1994; 102: 656–67.
- Wing S, Richardson D, Stewart A. The relevance of occupational epidemiology to radiation protection standards. New Solutions. 1999; 9: 133–51.
- Greene G. The Woman Who Knew Too Much: Alice Stewart and the Secrets of Radiation. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1999.
- Hardell L, Walker MJ, Walhjalt B, Friedman LS, Richter ED. Secret ties to industry and conflicting interests in cancer research. Am J Ind Med. 2007; 50: 227-40, including correspondence.
- Walker MJ. Sir Richard Doll: Death, dioxin and PVC. http://www.dipmatunipg.it/-mamone/sci-dem/contri/walker.htm; http://www.injurywatch.co.uk/news-and-groups/news/work-place-illness/exposed-workplace-cancer-naysayer-was-secretly-being-paid-by-drug-companies-231161138?searchterm-sir+richard+doll.
- Greenberg M. The evolution of attitudes to the human hazards of ionizing radiation and its investigators. Am J Ind Med. 1991; 20: 717–21.
- Morgan KZ. Changes in international radiation protection stan-dards. Am J Ind Med. 1994; 25: 301–7.
- Wing S, Shy CM, Wood JL, Wolf S, Cragle DL, Frome EL. Mor-tality among workers at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. JAMA. 1991; 265: 1397–402.
- Rojas-Burke J. Oak Ridge cancer findings hotly disputed. J Nucl Med. 1991;32 (7);11N-26N.
- Wing S, Richardson D, Armstrong D, Crawford-Brown D. A reevaluation of cancer incidence near the Three Mile Island nuclear plant: the collision of evidence and assumptions. Envi-ron Health Perspect. 1997; 105: 52–7; 105: 266-7; 105: 567-9; and 2000;108A546-7.
- Dalrymple M. Science on the firing line. Endeavors (U. of North Carolina). Autumn 1997: 12-13. http://research.unc.edu/endeavors/aut97/wing.html.
- Hatch MC, Beyea J, Nieves JW, Susser M. Cancer near the Three Mile Island nuclear plant: radiation emissions. Am J Epidemiol. 1990; 1342: 397–417.
- Wilkinson G. Seven years in search of alpha: The best of times, the worst of times. Epidemiology. 1999;:340–4.
- World Health Organization. Health Effects of the Chernobyl Accident and Special Health Care Programmes. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO, 2006.
- United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, New York: UNSCEAR 2000. Exposures and effects of the Chernobyl accident. Annex J. http://www.unscear.org/unscear/en/chernobyl.html
- Baverstock K, Williams D. The Chernobyl accident 20 years on: an assessment of the health consequences and the international responses. Environ Health Perspect. 2006; 114: 1312–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.9113.
- Nussbaum RH. The Chernobyl nuclear catastrophe: unac-knowledged health detriment. Environ Health Perspect. 2007; 115: A238-40. http://www.ehponline.org/docs/2007/115-5/ehp115pa238pdf.pdf.
- Pflugbeil S. Chernobyl-looking back to go forwards: the Sep-tember 2005 IAEA conference. Medicine, Conflict and Survival. 2006; 22: 299–309.
- Nussbaum RH. The linear no-threshold dose-effect relation; is it relevant to radiation protection? Med Phys. 1998; 25: 291–9.