[Mobile telephones: a 'new risk']. / Mobiel bellen: een 'nieuw risico'.

Mobile telephony has the characteristics of a 'new risk'. The exposure to the radiofrequency radiation of the mobile telephony system is not detected with the senses, and statements by experts that the technology is safe also evoke reactions of distrust. An unresolved question pertains to the degree of biological harm induced, and to the degree to which this harm--if any--is reversible in nature. Given the rapid penetration of mobile telephony in the global village, managing the associated risks should include a certain degree of precaution, e.g. in the form of sponsoring scientific research into the mechanisms of interaction between radiofrequency radiation and biological tissues, and especially into effects of such interactions in the long run.

Public health impact of large airports.

Large airports with the related infrastructure, businesses and industrial activities affect the health of the population living, travelling and working in the surroundings of or at the airport. The employment and contributions to economy from the airport and related operations are expected to have a beneficial effect, which, however, is difficult to quantify. More pertinent data are available on the, largely negative, health effects of environmental factors, such as air and soil pollution, noise, accident risk, and landscape changes. Information on the concurrent and cumulative impact of these factors is lacking, but is of primary relevance for public health policy. A committee of the Health Council of The Netherlands recently reviewed the data on the health impact of large airports. It was concluded that, generally, integrated health assessments are not available. Such assessments, as part of sustainable mobility policy, should accompany the further development of the global aviation system.

Noise exposure and public health.

Exposure to noise constitutes a health risk. There is sufficient scientific evidence that noise exposure can induce hearing impairment, hypertension and ischemic heart disease, annoyance, sleep disturbance, and decreased school performance. For other effects such as changes in the immune system and birth defects, the evidence is limited. Most public health impacts of noise were already identified in the 1960s and noise abatement is less of a scientific but primarily a policy problem. A subject for further research is the elucidation of the mechanisms underlying noise-induced cardiovascular disorders and the relationship of noise with annoyance and nonacoustical factors modifying health outcomes. A high priority study subject is the effects of noise on children, including cognitive effects and their reversibility. Noise exposure is on the increase, especially in the general living environment, both in industrialized nations and in developing world regions. This implies that in the twenty-first century noise exposure will still be a major public health problem.

Risk assessment: good for health?

Risk assessment is a scientific endeavour on which risk management can be based and policy priorities can be set. Of prime importance is the choice of risk attributes and the health indicators to focus upon. Problem ranking and priority setting depend strongly on that choice. In the current risk policy of The Netherlands' Ministry of the Environment 'individual risk' is defined as the probability of dying due to one year's exposure to a certain agent or activity. If this approach is applied to the indoor environment, strong mitigation measures should be taken concerning NO2, radon and particulate matter to improve the percentage of 'healthy homes'. However, risk is more than the chance to die. Therefore some more parameters should be used to characterize the indoor environment, like chemical and biological mixtures from outside and inside and activities of inhabitants. Important health indicators like irreversible/reversible physiological effects and nuisance should be taken into account. Risk has to tell us about the possibility of health damage, about the nature of health damage and about the uncertainty in both.

A union and consumer proposal for the regulation of enhanced natural radiation.

This paper discusses the problems related to enhanced exposure of workers to natural radiation and other pollutants in the working and living environment, with particular attention to radon. A method is proposed for regulating this high priority problem, which also considers the variable borderline between the controllable and uncontrollable exposure contributions. It is based on the principles of an integrated health policy regarding air quality. The complex multiple source exposure in private dwellings, at the workplace and through consumer goods should be taken into account as discussed in recent WHO and ILO reports. The important role of ventilation practices for future health is put forward. As far as regulation of exposure to ionizing radiation is concerned the present Euratom Basic Safety Standards are considered inadequate. Particular attention is given to a specification of justification and optimization and to a practical use of a hierarchy of limits as defined in the IAEA/ILO/WHO/NEA Basic Safety Standards.