[ RadSafe ] Re:Reasonable risk?
crispy_bird at yahoo.com
Fri Apr 21 12:20:53 CDT 2006
Of course, the problem is like how you and I define
risk. How do you determine how better to protect the
worker. Do you go with days-lost-on-the-job or mrem?
--- Sandy Perle <sandyfl at earthlink.net> wrote:
> On 21 Apr 2006 at 9:48, John Jacobus wrote:
> > I take a broader definition of ALARA and do not
> > the perspective you have with commerial nuclear
> > Afterall, I would at a biomedical research
> > have worked with the Navy Nuclear Propulsion
> > and medical facilities.
> I will be in two of the facilities next week, and
> understand their
> differecne as compared to the NPPs I've been
> involved with.
> > The underlying goal in these and many industries
> > worker protection. The difference is that in the
> > nuclear industries is that you can measure "risk"
> > mrem. Therefore, you can quantify what you do.
> > medicine, we can also measure risk from radiation
> > exposure to the patient and staff. However, the
> > measured output is not kW/hr, but medical
> > We certainly spend on radiation protection
> > e.g., leaded aprons, survey meters, etc. But we
> > spend on disposable gowns, gloves, pathological
> > wastes, etc.
> I agree. My only point was if ALARA is mis-used,
> which I do believe,
> then the cost savings can be applied to where
> actually needed, and
> the result is better worker protection.
> > In hospitals, you have to deal with operating
> costs and profits.
> In that sense, we were the same. The need to reduce
> operating and
> maintenance costs was essential in order to realize
> the maximum
> profit allowed by the rate regulatory agencies.
> Sandy Perle
"A scientist's aim in a discussion with his colleagues is not to persuade, but to clarify."
John Jacobus, MS
Certified Health Physicist
e-mail: crispy_bird at yahoo.com
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
More information about the RadSafe