. "5 Evaluating the Department of Health and Human Services Dissemination and Communication Efforts." Review of the Worker and Public Health Activities Program Administered by the Department of Energy and the Department of Health and Human Services. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2006.
The following HTML text is provided to enhance online
readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML.
Please use the page image
as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.
Review of the Worker and Public Health Activities Program Administered by the Department of Energy and the Department of Health and Human Services
ORNL (Oak Ridge National Laboratory). ORNL Review. 2002. Chapter 1. 25(3 and 4). Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
Parkin, R.T., L. Ragain, T. Guidotti, and G. Paranzino. 2003. Assessing the Health Education Needs of Residents in the Area of Oak Ridge Reservation, Tennessee. Final report. Washington, DC: Association of Occupational and Environmental Clinics.
Paulson, T. 2000. Hanford study finds high risk in low radiation; exposed workers died of cancer. Seattle Post-Intelligencer, April 11, p. A1.
Pepper, L. 2000. The health effects of downsizing in the nuclear industry: findings at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. Boston, MA: Boston University School of Public Health. Available from NIOSH/HERB, Cincinnati, OH; 135 pp.
Presidential/Congressional Commission on Risk Assessment and Risk Management. 1997. Final Report, Volume 1. Framework for Environmental Health Risk Management. Washington, DC.
PSR (Physicians for Social Responsibility). 1992. Dead Reckoning. Washington, DC.
Rankin, A. 2004. Lab problems not affecting CDC project. Albuquerque Journal, July 28.
Rankin, A. 2005. No contamination woes at LANL, report says. Albuquerque Journal, June 25, p. E2.
Rogers, E. 2005a. Oak Ridger, May 16. “ATSDR Defends Health Check.”
Rogers E. 2005b. Oak Ridger, June 15. “SENES President Claims PHA is ‘Misleading’.”
Rogers, E. 2005c. Oak Ridger, July 21. “ATSDR Discusses Clark University Study.”
Rogers, E. 2005d. Oak Ridger, July 18. “ATSDR Budget Reduction Debate.”
Schneider, K. 1988. How secrecy on atomic weapons helped breed a policy of disregard. New York Times, November 13, p. E7.
Schumacher, E. 1999. Many Hanford “downwinders” losing faith—those on Hanford dosage-study panel seek elusive radiation figures. Seattle Times, February 10, p. B2.
Seattle Post-Intelligencer. 2000. Hanford study finds high risk in low radiation; exposed workers died of cancer. April 11, p. A1.
Shonka, J., S. Flack, R. Burns, J. Budenbaum, J. O’Brien, K. Robinson, J. Knutsen, and D. Shonka. 2006. Interim report of the Los Alamos Historic Document Retrieval and Assessment (LAHDRA) Project. Version 4. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Slovic, P. 1987. Perception of risk. Science 236:280-285.
Slovic, P. 1993. Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Anal 13:675-682.
Slovic, P. 2000. Perception of risk from radiation. Pp. 264-274 in The Perception of Risk. London: Earthscan Publications.
Slovic, P., J. Flynn, and M. Layman. 1991. Perceived risk, trust and the politics of nuclear waste. Science 254:1603-1607.
Steele, K.D. 2000. Hanford health network to close; information service a victim of budget cuts at DOE. Spokane Spokesman Review, March 23.
Tuler, S., T. Webler, and R. Finson. 2005. Competing perspectives on public involvement: planning for risk characterization and risk communication about radiological contamination from a national laboratory. Health Risk & Society 7:247-266.
Webster’s Third New International Dictionary. 2003. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster Incorporated.
Wilkinson, G.S., N. Trieff, and R. Graham. 2000. Final Report: Study of Mortality Among Female Nuclear Weapons Workers. Buffalo, NY: State University of New York at Buffalo.
Zuckerbrod, N. 2004. Government having problems getting data on weapons plant workers’ exposure to radiation. Associated Press, May 13.