8,655 Studies Reviewed. 86.9% Found Biological Effects. The Evidence is Clear.
Shield Your Body

Note: This study found no significant biological effects under its experimental conditions. We include all studies for scientific completeness.

Whole Body / GeneralPart of the Glaser Archive

SAFETY GUIDE FOR VIDEO-DISPLAY TERMINALS

No Effects Found

P. Hansen · 1982

Share:

Government recognized VDT radiation as workplace safety concern in 1982, foreshadowing today's wireless device exposure issues.

Plain English Summary

Summary written for general audiences

This 1982 government safety guide examined radiation emissions from video display terminals (VDTs), the computer monitors widely used in offices at the time. The study focused on measuring X-ray and electromagnetic radiation levels to establish workplace safety standards. This research represents early recognition that electronic display devices could pose occupational health concerns through radiation exposure.

Finding

It can be stated unequivocally that Video Display Terminals do not emit levels of any electromagnetic radiation of any wavelength that could possibly be hazardous to any person, male or female, young or old, pregnant or not, and therefore do not present an occupational radiation hazard.

In their words

“It can be stated unequivocally that Video Display Terminals do not emit levels of any electromagnetic radiation of any wavelength that could possibly be hazardous to any person, male or female, young or old, pregnant or not, and therefore do not present an occupational radiation hazard.”

Study Details

To determine if Video Display Terminals emit hazardous levels of electromagnetic radiation and to provide safety guidelines for their use in the workplace.

Precise x-ray measurements were conducted on more than 300 VDTs comprising 150 models. Some measurem...

No x-rays were detected in any of the measurements conducted on over 300 VDTs. Even with highly sens...

Video Display Terminals do not emit levels of any electromagnetic radiation of any wavelength that could possibly be hazardous to any person, male or female, young or old, pregnant or not, and therefore do not present an occupational radiation hazard.

Cite This Study
P. Hansen (1982). SAFETY GUIDE FOR VIDEO-DISPLAY TERMINALS.
Show BibTeX
@article{safety_guide_for_video_display_terminals_g6003,
  author = {P. Hansen},
  title = {SAFETY GUIDE FOR VIDEO-DISPLAY TERMINALS},
  year = {1982},
  
  
}
No DOI on file for this study.

Quick Questions About This Study

Video display terminals emitted X-ray and electromagnetic radiation at levels that prompted government safety guidance for workplace use. The concern was significant enough to require official measurement protocols and safety recommendations for occupational exposure.
While VDTs primarily emitted low-frequency electromagnetic fields and minimal X-rays, today's wireless devices emit radiofrequency radiation at much higher frequencies and power levels, creating more complex exposure patterns throughout daily life.
As VDTs became standard workplace equipment in the early 1980s, concerns arose about potential health effects from prolonged occupational exposure to radiation emissions. Government agencies needed to establish safety standards for worker protection.
VDTs emitted X-ray radiation from their cathode ray tubes and electromagnetic radiation across various frequencies. The study focused on measuring these emissions to determine if they exceeded safe exposure levels for office workers.
This early government recognition that display devices warrant radiation safety evaluation parallels current debates about smartphone and wireless device emissions, showing that EMF exposure from electronic devices has been a recurring public health consideration.