The term is derived from “white bucks,” derby shoes made of laced suede or suede (or nubuck), usually with a red sole, that have long been popular with the Ivy League student body. [3] A 1953 Esquire article describing social classes at Yale University explained: “White Shoe applies primarily to socially ambitious and socially complacent types who influence much worldly sophistication, run, ride, and drink in rather small cliques, and watch the second half of football games in good weather.” [4] The Oxford English Dictionary cites the phrase “white-shoe college boys” in J.D. Salinger`s novel Franny and Zooey (1957) as the first use of the term:[5] “Phooey,” I said, “to all the white-shoed college students who publish their literary magazines on campus. Give me an honest cheater every day. [6] It also appears in a 1958 Fortune article by Spencer Klaw, which describes that some companies “have a preference for young men on the social register. These businesses are called “white shoe outfits,” a term derived from the suede shoes that were part of the accepted uniform in some Eastern Preparatory Schools and Colleges. “[7] Depending on the design of the machine, the movement of shielding materials, the duration and frequency of application, large dose fluctuations were possible. Radiation studies have shown that U.S. machines deliver an average of 13 Roentgen(r) (about 0.13 sieverts (Sv) equivalent dose in modern units) to the customer`s feet during a typical 20-second visualization, one of which is capable of delivering 116 r (~1 Sv) in 20 seconds. [6] British podoscopes were about ten times less powerful. [7] A client may try on several shoes in one day or return several times a year, and the effects of radiation dose may be cumulative. [7] A dose of 300 r can cause growth retardation in a child,[6] and 600 r can cause erythema in an adult.
Hands and feet are relatively resistant to other forms of radiation damage, such as carcinogenesis. Shoe retailers have denied allegations of possible harm in newspaper articles and opinion pieces. They argued that the use of the devices prevented damage to customers` feet that would otherwise have been caused by ill-fitting shoes. [13] [14] [15] A footwear fluoroscope was a metal structure covered with finished wood, approximately 4 feet (1.2 m) high in the form of a short column, with a rocky outcrop with an opening where the child (or adult client) then placed their feet in the designated opening and remained in a standing position, looking down through a visible porthole at the top of the fluoroscope and X-ray view of feet and shoes. Two more visible portholes on each side allowed the parent and a salesman to watch the child`s toes move to show how much room there was for the toes in the shoe. The bones of the feet were clearly visible, as were the contours of the shoe, including the seams on the edges. The term comes from Ivy League colleges and originally reflected a stereotype of old businesses populated by white Anglo-Saxon Protestants (WASP). The term is most often used to describe Wall Street`s leading law firms and financial institutions, as well as accounting firms dating back more than a century, usually in New York and Boston. [1] The only former Big Eight company that did not merge into one of the Big Four was Arthur Andersen, which went out of business in 2002 after the Enron scandal. Years or decades can pass between radiation exposure and the associated development of cancer, and due to lack of records, no follow-up studies can be conducted by clients.
However, a 1950 medical paper on machines pointed out: “Current evidence suggests that at least some radiological lesions are statistical processes that have no threshold. If this evidence is valid, there is no exposure that is completely safe and has no effect. [6] Three shoe sellers were identified as having rare conditions that may be related to their chronic occupational exposure: severe radiation burn requiring amputation,[11] one case of ulcerative dermatitis in 1957,[12] and one case of basal cell carcinoma of the sole in 2004. [9] The danger of radiation burns to the extremities had been known since Wilhelm Röntgen`s experiment of 1895, but it was a short-term effect with early warning of erythema. The long-term risks of chronic radiation exposure began with the work of Hermann Joseph Muller in 1927, which showed genetic effects,[5] and the incidence of bone cancer in radium dial painters of the same period. However, there was not enough data to quantify the risk until atomic bomb survivors began to feel the long-term effects of radiation in the late 1940s. The first scientific evaluations of these machines in 1948 immediately raised concerns about radiation protection and electrical safety and found them ineffective for fitting shoes. [6] The current Big Four accounting firms and the former accountants of the Big Eight they merged with: there was no regulation when shoe fluoroscopes were invented. An estimated 10,000 machines were sold in the United States, 3,000 in the United Kingdom, 1,500 in Switzerland and 1,000 in Canada before authorities began advising against their use.
[9] As understanding of the long-term health effects of radiation increased, various organisms began to express themselves and regulate machines.
