Is Health Physics Really A Profession?

[LIPTONW@dteenergy.com]

I thought that most of the responses to the question regarding "idiot proof 
survey meters" were excellent, but the very fact that such a question was 
asked and taken seriously bothers me deeply.   
 
I doubt that anyone in the medical profession asks his colleagues about an 
"idiot proof scalpel" or an "idiot proof heart-lung machine."  It's
generally 
accepted that you can't practice medicine without a physician, and I've
never 
met a physician who considers himself to be an idiot.  However, there seems
to 
be a widely held belief that, to practice health physics, you don't need a 
health physicist; just an "idiot proof survey meter."  This is not new with 
this posting.  When I worked at a DOE lab, some of the scientists kept
asking 
me to give them survey meters; and then I wouldn't have to survey their
labs.   
 
This forces me to ask the question, "Is health physics really a profession?"
 
I don't intend to be facetious.  It's just that we have to answer this among 
ourselves, before we can effectively address public perceptions.   
 
I propose that a group of people with similar knowledge and skills must meet
3 
criteria to be considered a profession: 
 
(1) To be considered a member of this profession, an individual must master
an 
established set of knowledge and skills.  We've made a start, here, but 
there's a long way to go.  ABHP has done a lot, and should be congratulated.
 
However, the CHP exam was never intended as a line between those who are 
professional health physicists and those who aren't.  As a matter of fact, 
I've seen little correlation between certification and job performance.
(BTW, 
I am a CHP.)  At the other end of the spectrum, I've seen a lot of
individuals 
who call themselves health physicists, but aren't even close - "Have survey 
meter (idiot proof, I hope), will travel." 
 
(2) The members of a profession must perform some socially useful function - 
i.e., organized crime is not a profession.  I think we're ok, here;
although, 
when we start wasting resources on protecting society from man-millirems, or 
zapping beagles to get the n-th significant digit on some uptake function, I 
have my doubts. 
 
(3) A member of a profession who expresses a professional opinion can be 
refuted only by another member of that profession; i.e. to sue a physician
for 
malpractice, you have to get another physician to testify for you.  Here's 
where we really fail!  Ask my friends at Brookhaven, where Alec Baldwin and 
Helen Caldicott seem to have more credibility on health physics issues than 
health physicists.   
 
I'd be interested in your thoughts on this. 
 
Ok, it's been a long week.  Maybe, I'll be in a better mood by Monday; but, 
regardless, this won't go away. 
 
The opinions expressed are strictly mine. 
It's not about dose it's about trust. 
 
Bill Lipton 
liptonw@dteenergy.com 

************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html