As ionizing radiations are used in health care and non-health care situations that may not be always classified as "medicine" the document would benefit by being made more generic to include such domains as dentistry, chiropractor, veterinary practice and industrial non-destructive testing. The term medical should be replaced by "health care and other users of diagnostic ionizing radiations" throughout. The example of medical students and practitioners should be expanded to include dental, veterinary, chiropractor, and industrial users of diagnostic radiation. The current draft terminology is much too restrictive. There is need to better define the professionals using ionnizing radiation for interpretative/diagnostic reasons at the start of this document. It should be remembered that there are specialties in radiology outside medicine per se, including oral and maxillofacial radiology in dentistry, veterinary radiology, etc. Some such professionals in some countries use ionizing radiations for therapy as well as diagnosis. A wider range of individuals need to be represented on the panel developing this document to ensure it is made sufficiently comprehensive. I am disappointed by the failure of this document in its present form to provide adequately comprehensive guidelines.