[ RadSafe ] New Radiation Protection Unit? The Taylor (Ty)

[John R Johnson]

Jim, George et al

I agree that the dosimetry units can cause "confusion", but at least they
are an attempt to quantify the radiation risk.

I think this is better than the situation with non radiation carcinogens; or
am I missing something?

Having tried (with Philippe) to quantify to risk from exposure to radiation
in uranium mines(uranium ore dust,  radon and progeny, silica, arsenic and
diesel exhaust), I think there is need for quantities like effective and
equivalent dose for other carcinogens so we can add them all together.

John
 _________________
John R Johnson, Ph.D.
*****
President, IDIAS, Inc
4535 West 9-Th Ave
Vancouver B. C.
V6R 2E2
(604) 222-9840
idias at interchange.ubc.ca
*****
or most mornings
Consultant in Radiation Protection
TRIUMF
4004 Wesbrook Mall
Vancouver B. C.
V6R 2E2
(604) 222-1047 Ext. 6610
Fax: (604) 222-7309
johnsjr at triumf.ca

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl]On
Behalf Of Muckerheide, James
Sent: November 23, 2005 1:56 PM
To: vargo at physicist.net; RADSAFE
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] New Radiation Protection Unit? The Taylor (Ty)


This is great George!

However, in fairness to the many fine 'Goldbergs' who should rightly take
umbrage, I suggest that it instead be just named the "Rube."

Also, of course, while it is in the purview of NCRP, it is not in the
purview
of ICRP, but rather ICRU, which, IIRC, has expressed some disdain for the
unscientific nature of this whole construct of ICRP/NCRP nonsense of
applying
(implying) scientific units to the unmeasurable and unknowable.

Regards, Jim Muckerheide
=========================


> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On
> Behalf Of George J. Vargo
> Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2005 4:37 PM
> To: RADSAFE
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] New Radiation Protection Unit? The Taylor (Ty)
>
> (My apologies to the international participants for my parochial humor)
>
> I missed the origination of this thread.  Is it April 1st already?
>
> Personally, I would not want to sully the great reputation of Lauriston
> Taylor by linking it to some of the recent ruminations of the ICRP.
> Instead
> I would offer that ICRP pass on adopting the "Taylor" in favor of the
> "Goldberg" in honor of that great American inventor of the awkward,
> complex and arcane.
>
> George J. Vargo, Ph.D., CHP
> Senior Scientist
> MJW Corporation
> http://www.mjwcorp.com
> 610-925-3377
> 610-925-5545 (fax)
> vargo at physicist.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/
_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/