Posted By Geoff Burt Not sure I dare ask a question following the lively debate on competence - but here goes! I was told yesterday by an authoritive source - an IT consultant, so he should know - that VDUs should be replaced after 3 years because the radiation levels start to increase and thus increase the risk to operators. I haven't heard this before and was hoping someone could advise, or at least tell me where I can get further information? Geoff Burt

Posted By Graham Bullough You are right to voice your query. You are demonstrating competence, an important part of which includes knowing the limits of your existing knowledge, seeking more information and querying the advice given to you by the IT "consultant". As with any profession, none of us in health and safety knows everything about everything - Each of us has a unique continuous learning curve and its shape and our position on it varies from person to person. As some of the replies to the recent thread about competency mentioned, anyone can use the title of "consultant" for most occupations without having to be competent, qualified or knowledgeable in their subject/s. If you are able, I would contact the IT consultant to politely ask him for the source of his advice about replacing VDU's after 3 years because it doesn't seem to be generally known, and then share his reply with us. Have any other forum viewers heard about such advice and from what sources? Neither my colleagues and I nor my employer's IT specialists are aware that radiation levels from VDUs increase with the age of the VDUs. Therefore, we suspect it's a ploy by one or more people to boost their sales of VDUs. Radiation from VDU screens was a hot topic in the early 1980's. Although experts then deemed such radiation levels to be insignificant, some VDU users suffered considerable anxiety about alleged harmful levels and makers/sellers of heavy and expensive "VDU radiation smocks" benefited financially for a while from the anxiety which they helped to promote! No doubt other viewers of this thread who are suitably qualified and experienced in radiation matters will be replying with sound information. If there is a developing myth that VDUs need to be regularly replaced for health reasons, it is appropriate that we are aware of it and its status so that we can correctly advise other people who are likely to learn about it, just as we do with the other myths like the risk to welders with contact lenses and the need for lead workers to drink lots of milk!

Posted By Diane Warne Bear in mind that an IT "consultant" (and I fully agree with Graham's point about people describing themselves as consultants) might be an expert on software but know very little about the hardware. So this person might be far from an authoritative source on this subject. My colleague, 2 offices along is our Radiation Protection Adviser, very well qualified and experienced, and sits in front of a quite old VDU for most of the day - I am quite certain that he wouldn't if there was a risk from radiation! Ask this person for some factual information: a) What type of radiation is emitted b) What is the dose rate that would be received from the VDU by the worker c) How does this dose rate increase with time over and beyond the three year period he is talking about d) Where are the health data showing that workers might be harmed. Data, not gossip! I bet you ten quid he won't be able to come up with the hard facts. As Graham says this could be a new scare story - it sounds a lot like Radiation Is Scary syndrome to me. I will happily stand corrected if I lose my tenner. Diane Warne

Posted By Geoff Burt Thanks for the responses. In fact the Consultant works for a client and I got the information second hand. The first question I asked was 'does the guy also sell VDUs' - he does! I've now put the questions - via the client - that Diane put forward, so we'll see if we get an answer, but I very much doubt it. Thanks Geoff

Posted By John Murphy This an extract from an e-mail sent to by one of our officers who works in the IT department. He was demanding a TFT monitor because of the health effects associated with VDU's. 1) Electromagnetic radiation seriously effects everyone and everything. 2) I assume councils and companies take their lead from the government HSE which is seriously flawed. 3) Just because there is no immediate mutated growth effects visible to the so called scientific eye does not mean that the effect is serious. 4) Electomagnetic radiation effects humans because they are electomagnetic structures. 5) There is plenty of scientific, analytical studies, reports and evidence to support this if the enquirer wishes to enlighten themselves. 6) I do not trust any doucment or report from any Health and Safety authority which does not take the whole picture into account. Difficult to argue with this rather emotive approach. Another case of RIS syndrome!! John

Posted By Paul Leadbetter It's been a long time since I was involved with ionising radiation so I may be wrong but isn't ionising radiation only a problem with CRTs if the accelerating voltage is greater than 5kV? Regards Paul Leadbetter