[ RadSafe ] Re: self-absorption of
Mark Sonter
sontermj at tpg.com.au
Thu Dec 21 05:54:49 CST 2006
Self absorption of alphas: note that for nearly all alphas (in the range
5 to 7 MeV) self absorption is near complete for areal density of about
5 mg/cm2. Do a check: 3 cm of air, or 1 sheet of 80 gsm copy paper will
also stop these alphas.
Mark J Sonter
Radiation Advice & Solutions Pty Ltd abn 31 891 761 435
Asteroid Enterprises Pty Ltd abn 53 008 115 302
116 Pennine Drive
South Maclean Queensland 4280 Australia
phone / fax 07 3297 7653
“Keep everything as simple as possible and no simpler” – Albert Einstein
radsafe-request at radlab.nl wrote:
> Send radsafe mailing list submissions to
> radsafe at radlab.nl
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.radlab.nl/mailman/listinfo/radsafe
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> radsafe-request at radlab.nl
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> radsafe-owner at radlab.nl
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of radsafe digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. RE: RE: 15000 units of Po210 (John R Johnson)
> 2. RE: RE: 15000 units of Po210 (Muckerheide, Jim (CDA))
> 3. Polonium Source "misplaced" (Nielsen, Erik)
> 4. Infant goes through airport X-ray machine (Sandy Perle)
> 5. Detecting Alphas (Syd H. Levine)
> 6. Re: Infant goes through airport X-ray machine (stewart farber)
> 7. RE: Infant goes through airport X-ray machine
> (Muckerheide, Jim (CDA))
> 8. Re: Infant goes through airport X-ray machine (LNMolino at aol.com)
> 9. Re: Infant goes through airport X-ray machine ( Sandy Perle )
> 10. Re: Infant goes through airport X-ray machine (LNMolino at aol.com)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 09:33:44 -0800
> From: John R Johnson <idias at interchange.ubc.ca>
> Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] RE: 15000 units of Po210
> To: Jim Hardeman <Jim_Hardeman at dnr.state.ga.us>
> Cc: radsafe at radlab.nl
> Message-ID: <FCENJPOCLBJKKLPINJIKAEEDDMAA.idias at interchange.ubc.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Jim
>
> Do the alphas have to reach the air, or do they do their "job" by creating a
> charged surface?
>
> John
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl]On
> Behalf Of Jim Hardeman
> Sent: December 20, 2006 8:51 AM
> To: radsafe at radlab.nl
> Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] RE: 15000 units of Po210
>
>
> How much self-absorption would there be in a setup like that for the 5.3 MeV
> alpha?
>
> Jim
>
>>>> "North, David" <DNorth at Lifespan.org> 12/20/2006 11:30 >>>
> Remembering from when I owned such anti-static brushes for photography, the
> Po-210 is sealed inside tiny ceramic beads, roughly the size of fine sand
> grains, which are fixed onto a metal strip by lacquer or some such adhesive.
> The strip is then behind a small metal cage to protect the mounted beads.
>
> David L. North, Sc.M., DABR
> Associate Physicist
> Medical Physics
> Main Bldg. Rm 317
> Rhode Island Hospital
> 593 Eddy St.
> Providence, RI 02903
> (401)444-5961
> fax: (401)444-4446
> dnorth at lifespan.org
>
>
>
>> ----------
>> From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl on behalf of Bernard L. Cohen
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 10:50
>> To: Jim Hardeman
>> Cc: radsafe at radlab.nl
>> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] RE: 15000 units of Po210
>>
>> Does anyone know how the Po-210 sources are securely sealed without
>> stopping the alpha particles which are used to eliminate static electic
>> charges? The seal must really be secure because escaping Polonium is
>> highly volatile and once released it spreads everywhere.
>>
>>
>> Jim Hardeman wrote:
>>
>>> Folks --
>>>
>>> I went back and looked at Georgia's Rules and Regulations for
>>> Radioactive Materials ... NRC's and most states' regulations for
>>> exemptions and the like should be similar (if not identical).
>>>
>>> As I indicated in an earlier e-mail, the exempt quantity for Po-210 is
>>> 0.1 microcurie (good memory on my part!). There is, however, a provision
>>> for general licensure for static elimination devices containing sealed
>>> Po-210 sources up to 500 microcuries ... I'm not sure as to these
>>> particular devices (I'm not in our materials program) but normally
>>> persons selling generally licensed devices are required to report to the
>>> radiation control authority in a particular jurisdiction the names,
>>> addresses, etc. of persons or firms acquiring such devices within their
>>> jurisdiction ... and this notification requirement may vary from one
>>> jurisdiction to another. The distinction between an exempt source and
>>> one acquired under a general license may be subtle, but the general
>>> license does at least allow for "some" ability to backtrack. But the
>>> bottom line is, yes, it is is legal for "anyone" to own a static
>>> elimination device containing up to 500 uCi Po-210 ... and for that
>>> matter, there's no legal restriction against "anyone" possessing more
>>> than one (1) of these devices.
>>>
>>> My $0.02 worth ...
>>>
>>> Jim Hardeman
>>> Jim_Hardeman at dnr.state.ga.us
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> Keith Welch <welch at jlab.org> 12/19/06 11:09 AM >>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> Ten million dollars? Sheeesh. Looks like United Nuclear is part of the
>>>
>>> problem. That info on their website is just bogus. You can buy 500 uCi
>>>
>>> (I seem to remember a consensus that a few millicuries is lethal) static
>>>
>>> eliminator sources for 20 bucks (online, with a credit card and no
>>> license). And that news report is even more flaky. What a bunch of
>>> hogwash. Sounds like some rag-mag trying to fan the flame of a
>>> conspiracy theory. Fact is anybody with a credit card can buy enough Po
>>>
>>> to kill someone with, and could likely produce the poison by simple
>>> mechanical means (it wouldn't take a chemist or physicist). Yes, they'd
>>>
>>> get pretty contaminated doing it, and they'd waste a lot of the Po, and
>>> it might not be in the most efficient form to be absorbed, but hey, it's
>>>
>>> cheap, just buy ten times more than you need. Basic precautions would
>>> keep them from killing themselves in the process. My guess is
>>> somewhere, someone's got a really crapped-up basement - but not for too
>>> long.
>>>
>>> Keith Welch
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 09:23:45 -0500
>>>> From: Cindy Bloom <radbloom at comcast.net>
>>>> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Po-210: What is a unit?
>>>> To: <radsafe at radlab.nl>
>>>> Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20061219092228.03561380 at mail.comcast.net>
>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed>
>>>>
>>>> The United Nuclear's website supports Jim's conjecture.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.unitednuclear.com/isotopes.htm
>>>>
>>>> Cindy
>>>>
>>>> At 09:01 AM 12/19/2006 -0500, Jim Hardeman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Ivor --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just guessing, but I would think that "unit" in this context means
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> amount of material present in one of the sources that United Nuclear
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> offers for sale for $69 ... sort of like counting how many smoke
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> detectors
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> you would need to make an RDD. If I remember correctly, the United
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> Nuclear
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> sources are distributed in the US as exempt items ... meaning that
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> each
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> one (from memory) would contain ~0.1 microcurie or less of Po-210.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jim Hardeman
>>>>>> Jim_Hardeman at dnr.state.ga.us
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ivor Surveyor <isurveyor at vianet.net.au> 12/18/2006 18:29 >>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> The following report is from the
>>>>>> AUSTRALIAN. Can somebody please explain what
>>>>>> is meant by a "unit of radioactivity," as quoted in the article.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Russian spy's fatal dose of poison cost $13m
>>>>>> Correspondents in London
>>>>>> 19dec06
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BRITISH police believe the radioactive substance
>>>>>> used to kill former Russian spy Alexander
>>>>>> Litvinenko cost more than $US10 million ($13 million).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> According to The Times, preliminary results from
>>>>>> the post-mortem examination on Litvinenko's body
>>>>>> have shown he was given more than 10 times the
>>>>>> lethal dose of polonium-210, large quantities of
>>>>>> which were found in his urine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Only a state-sponsored organisation could obtain
>>>>>> such a large amount of polonium-210 without
>>>>>> raising suspicion on the international market,"
>>>>>> said Alexander Goldfarb, a friend of Litvinenko.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> United Nuclear Scientific Supplies, based in New
>>>>>> Mexico - one of the few companies allowed to sell
>>>>>> polonium-210 over the internet - said it would
>>>>>> take at least 15,000 units of the isotope to kill someone.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> With each unit costing $US69, it would have cost
>>>>>> more than $US10 million to deliver Litvinenko's fatal dose.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "You can't buy this much off the internet or
>>>>>> steal it from a laboratory without raising an
>>>>>> alarm, so the only two plausible explanations for
>>>>>> the source are that it was obtained from a
>>>>>> nuclear reactor or very well-connected
>>>>>> black-market smugglers," an unidentified British security source
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> said.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> British detectives working on the case in Moscow
>>>>>> were due to return to Britain this week.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Security sources said Russian officials refused
>>>>>> to ask questions of Andrei Lugovoi and Dmitri
>>>>>> Kovtun - both of whom met Litvinenko on the day
>>>>>> he fell ill - that British detectives wanted
>>>>>> answered. They had not complained publicly
>>>>>> because of the importance of the case to
>>>>>> diplomatic relations between Britain and Russia.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> High-ranking Kremlin officials have mocked
>>>>>> Litvinenko's boasts, after he defected to
>>>>>> Britain, about his role in their security services.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Minister of Defence Sergei Ivanov claimed that
>>>>>> Litvinenko, far from being a top KGB spy as he
>>>>>> liked to claim, was merely a prison guard.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mr Ivanov said Litvinenko had never had access to
>>>>>> secret or important information and was "of such
>>>>>> poor character" he was dismissed from the Russian
>>>>>> security agency when it was being run by Vladimir Putin.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "He was never a spy and never knew anything of
>>>>>> any real value to give to any (foreign
>>>>>> intelligence) service," Mr Ivanov said. "He was>
>>>>>> just a Russian who meant nothing to us."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Referring to the letter in which Litvinenko
>>>>>> accused the Kremlin of poisoning him, Mr Ivanov
>>>>>> said:"We didn't care what he said and what he wrote on his
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> deathbed."
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> Kremlin officials again described the accusations
>>>>>> of Russian involvement made by Litvinenko and his friends as
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> ludicrous.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> Valentin Velichko, a colonel who is president of
>>>>>> Honour and Dignity, a powerful group of KGB
>>>>>> veterans, dismissed Litvinenko as "a nonentity".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He said in an interview with the Rossiiskaya
>>>>>> Gazeta newspaper that Litvinenko was never a
>>>>>> target for Russian intelligence because he was
>>>>>> not important enough to bother with.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/
>>>
>> --
>> <ETH>Ïࡱá
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 12:37:16 -0500
> From: "Muckerheide, Jim \(CDA\)" <Jim.Muckerheide at state.ma.us>
> Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] RE: 15000 units of Po210
> To: "Jim Hardeman" <Jim_Hardeman at dnr.state.ga.us>,
> <radsafe at radlab.nl>, "Bernard L. Cohen" <blc+ at pitt.edu>
> Message-ID:
> <819D4259707E404C934FBF454FF36AEE08BB2D at ES-MSG-002.es.govt.state.ma.us>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>> So no alpha-emitters: 3-yr Po-208 and 100-year Po-209! :-)
>>
>> On construction, from ORAU:
>> http://www.orau.org/PTP/collection/consumer%20products/staticeliminato
>> r.htm
>>
>> In fabricating the older static eliminators of the type shown here,
>> polonium-210 was adsorbed on the surface of a silicate ion exchange
>> resin which was then heated so that the silica was converted into a
>> ceramic. This meant that the polonium-210 was bound within the ceramic
>> matrix. The beads, approximately 20 to 60 um in diameter, were then
>> affixed with an epoxy resin to a metal (e.g., aluminum) plate. Since
>> the microspheres were not covered with any type of protective coating,
>> an open metal grill was used to prevent the source from being touched.
>> The soft bristle brush was positioned next to the source in order to
>> remove the dust.
>>
>> The following description from NUREG-1717 describes the fabrication of
>> the sources for the newer static eliminators: "A technology similar to
>> that used in making 241Am sources for smoke detectors is currently
>> being used to make the 210Po sources. The 210Po sources made of
>> ceramic microspheres are no longer used in the manufacturing of static
>> elimination devices in the United States. The 210Po sources made in
>> the United States have a silver backing plate covered by a thin gold
>> foil and a second composite foil of gold and 210Po. These foils are
>> locked together by a pressure weld metallurgy process. The composite
>> foil of gold and 210Po is then gold plated to provide an encapsulated
>> source that is insoluble and inert in most chemicals. The solid metal
>> source is mechanically fastened within a rigid housing and steps are
>> taken to prevent disassembly of the source housing."
>>
>>
>> Here's a good picture of the "new technology."
>> http://www.company7.com/library/staticmaster/AlphaIonization.p.pdf
>>
>> Regards, Jim Muckerheide
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl
>>> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On Behalf Of Jim Hardeman
>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 11:42 AM
>>> To: radsafe at radlab.nl
>>> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] RE: 15000 units of Po210
>>>
>>> Bernie --
>>>
>>> Would seem to me that the half-life would insure that
>>> "serious" folks would be buying your product every few years
>>> ... with this, you don't need to "build in" obsolescence ...
>>> it's already built into the very nature of the product! To
>>> quote the Guinness guys -- "BRILLIANT!"
>>>
>>> Jim
>>>
>>>>>> "Bernard L. Cohen" <blc+ at pitt.edu> 12/20/2006 10:59 >>>
>>> Isn't the short half life (138 days) a real pain in a
>>> non-industrial
>>> application like stereos?
>>>
>>> welch at jlab.org wrote:
>>>
>>>> I haven't seen the ones for stereos, but they do make
>>> hand-held brushes
>>>> used in photography for cleaning film, and there are
>>> industrial-type units
>>>> used in manufacturing.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Keith,
>>>>>
>>>>> Almost makes you feel sorry for those unfortunate murderers
>>> who've wasted
>>>>> all that money on bullets and knives when they could have
>>> just pulled a few
>>>>> static eliminator brushes off convenient stereos and gone on
>>> a killing spree. I found 1960 and 1980 models of "eliminators" on
>> the
>>> internet -- are they still available, or gone with the turntable?
>>>>> Ed Hiserodt
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 10:23:07 -0800
> From: "Nielsen, Erik" <nielseec at nv.doe.gov>
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Polonium Source "misplaced"
> To: radsafe at radlab.nl
> Message-ID:
> <E7D7089361FF4444A65D560F160DD4C6016D8E66 at rsln-exchpo1-ws.NTS.OPS>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> I wonder how many of these are "lost" a year. From previous postings it
> appears as though the orginal activity on this article would be a fatal
> dose if ingested/inhaled.
>
> General Information or Other Event Number: 42341
> Rep Org: TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
> Licensee: TEXAS INSTRUMENTS
> Region: 4
> City: DALLAS State: TX
> County:
> License #: G1800
> Agreement: Y
> Docket:
> NRC Notified By: RUBEN CORTEZ
> HQ OPS Officer: BILL HUFFMAN Notification Date: 02/15/2006
> Notification Time: 18:04 [ET]
> Event Date: 02/13/2006
> Event Time: [CST]
> Last Update Date: 02/15/2006
> Emergency Class: NON EMERGENCY
> 10 CFR Section:
> AGREEMENT STATE
> Person (Organization):
> DAVID GRAVES (R4)
> E. WILLIAM BRACH (NMSS)
>
> Event Text
> AGREEMENT STATE - LOSS OF CONTROL OF POLONIUM SOURCE
>
> The State of Texas reported that a static eliminator with 20 millicurie
> Polonium-210 source (based on a January 2005 assay) was inadvertently
> shipped to Taiwan without radioactive material controls or the knowledge
> of the RSO for the licensee. The RSO received a Po-210 source for
> renewal of the source in a static eliminator and discovered that the
> eliminator was missing. The licensee determined that the static
> eliminator with the depleted Po-210 source had been shipped to Taiwan
> without consideration of the Po-210 source in the eliminator. There is
> currently no indication that the source is lost - but it is no longer
> under the licensee's control. Investigation into this event is ongoing.
>
> THIS MATERIAL EVENT CONTAINS A "LESS THAN CAT 3" LEVEL OF RADIOACTIVE
> MATERIAL
>
> Sources that are "Less than IAEA Category 3 sources," are either sources
> that are very unlikely to cause permanent injury to individuals or
> contain a very small amount of radioactive material that would not cause
> any permanent injury. Some of these sources, such as moisture density
> gauges or thickness gauges that are Category 4, the amount of unshielded
> radioactive material, if not safely managed or securely protected, could
> possibly - although it is unlikely - temporarily injure someone who
> handled it or were otherwise in contact with it, or who were close to it
> for a period of many weeks.
> Erik C. Nielsen
> Senior Scientist
> Remote Sensing Laboratory
> P.O. Box 98521, M/S RSL-47
> Las Vegas, NV 89193-8521
> http://www.nv.doe.gov/nationalsecurity/homelandsecurity/frmac/default.ht
> m
> Voice 702-295-8954
> Fax 702-794-1007
> Pager 702-794-7222
> Cell 702-630-2323
> Text to Pager 702794722 at nv dot doe dot gov (plain text please)
> Text to Cell: 7026302323 at mmode dot com (plain text please)
> This email message is intended only for the use of the named recipient.
> Information contained in this email message and its attachments may be
> privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not
> the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this
> communication to others. Also please notify the sender by replying to
> this message and then delete it from your system.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 14:15:00 -0800
> From: "Sandy Perle" <sandyfl at earthlink.net>
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Infant goes through airport X-ray machine
> To: radsafe at radlab.nl, jacobusj at ors.od.nih.gov
> Message-ID: <45894564.29693.BCBADD7 at sandyfl.earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Received this courtesy of John Jacobus on another listserver:
>
> Note: The actions taken by TSA are beyond ridiculous. The X-ray
> machines used for checked bags emits such an infinitesimally small
> radiation exposure, significantly less than a chest x-ray. Yet they
> send the baby to a hospital and consider whether the baby received a
> "dangerous dose of radiation"! Guess you can pass film through the X-
> tray unit and not be concerned that there will be any fogging, but be
> concerned about a baby, knowing that there really is no dose! Look at
> the message this sends all of the other passengers, hospital
> personnel, EMT personnel, etc.!
>
> Story Highlights
> o Grandmother leaves infant in plastic bin at airport X-ray machine
> o Baby goes through machine at Los Angeles International Airport
> o Baby checked out at hospital and is fine
>
> LOS ANGELES, California (Reuters) --
>
> A woman sent her 1-month-old grandson through an X-ray machine at Los
> Angeles International Airport, security officials said Wednesday.
>
> The woman, who spoke little English and was traveling to Mexico, put
> the infant in a plastic bin used to hold loose carry-on items for
> security scanning at the busy airport Saturday morning.
>
> Security screeners saw the baby as it started to pass through, pulled
> the bin out, and immediately sought medical assistance for the child,
> Transportation Security Administration spokesman Nico Melendez said.
>
> The baby was examined at a local hospital and judged not to have
> received a dangerous dose of radiation.
>
> "The lady obviously mistakenly put the baby in the machine. It was an
> unfortunate incident," Melendez said.
>
> Airport officials said it was an innocent mistake by an inexperienced
> traveler and only the second such incident there since 1988, when a
> baby in a car seat went through an X-ray scanner.
>
> -------------------------------------
> Sandy Perle
> Senior Vice President, Technical Operations
> Global Dosimetry Solutions, Inc.
> 2652 McGaw Avenue
> Irvine, CA 92614
>
> Tel: (949) 296-2306 / (888) 437-1714 Extension 2306
> Fax:(949) 296-1144
>
> E-Mail: sperle at dosimetry.com
> E-Mail: sandyfl at earthlink.net
>
> Global Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com/
> Personal Website: http://sandy-travels.com/
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 17:27:12 -0500
> From: "Syd H. Levine" <syd.levine at mindspring.com>
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Detecting Alphas
> To: <radsafe at radlab.nl>
> Message-ID: <000c01c72486$0086cb80$0100a8c0 at House>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> I was under the impression that normal G-M tubes, even thin window ones,
> could not detect alpha particles. Given that alphas only travel a couple of
> inches through air and that a piece of paper stops them, this always seemed
> logical to me. Now I am told G-M tubes detect alphas just fine, and I am
> thinking I must have lost my mind in remembering otherwise.
>
> Can anybody shed light ion this subject?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Syd H. Levine
> AnaLog Services, Inc.
> Phone: (270) 276-5671
> Telefax: (270) 276-5588
> E-mail: analog at logwell.com
> Web URL: www.logwell.com
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 17:29:56 -0500
> From: "stewart farber" <radproject at sbcglobal.net>
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Infant goes through airport X-ray machine
> To: <jacobusj at ors.od.nih.gov>, <radsafe at radlab.nl>, "Sandy Perle"
> <sandyfl at earthlink.net>
> Message-ID: <002001c72486$602ba880$0302a8c0 at YOUR7C60552B9E>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Hi all,
>
> I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the first thing physicians ordered at the hospital in checking out the infant was an x-ray or CT scan. :-)
>
> "From ghoulies and ghosties and long-legged beasties, and things that go bump in the night, good Lord deliver us."
>
>
> Happy holidays & best wishes to everyone in the New Year.
>
> Stewart Farber, MS Public Health
> Farber Technical Services
> 1285 Wood Ave.
> Bridgeport, CT 06604
> [203] 441-8433 [office]
> [203] 522-2817 [cell]
> email: radproject at sbcglobal.net
>
> ======================================
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sandy Perle" <sandyfl at earthlink.net>
> To: <radsafe at radlab.nl>; <jacobusj at ors.od.nih.gov>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 5:15 PM
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Infant goes through airport X-ray machine
>
>
>> Received this courtesy of John Jacobus on another listserver:
>>
>> Note: The actions taken by TSA are beyond ridiculous. The X-ray
>> machines used for checked bags emits such an infinitesimally small
>> radiation exposure, significantly less than a chest x-ray. Yet they
>> send the baby to a hospital and consider whether the baby received a
>> "dangerous dose of radiation"! Guess you can pass film through the X-
>> tray unit and not be concerned that there will be any fogging, but be
>> concerned about a baby, knowing that there really is no dose! Look at
>> the message this sends all of the other passengers, hospital
>> personnel, EMT personnel, etc.!
>>
>> Story Highlights
>> o Grandmother leaves infant in plastic bin at airport X-ray machine
>> o Baby goes through machine at Los Angeles International Airport
>> o Baby checked out at hospital and is fine
>>
>> LOS ANGELES, California (Reuters) --
>>
>> A woman sent her 1-month-old grandson through an X-ray machine at Los
>> Angeles International Airport, security officials said Wednesday.
>>
>> The woman, who spoke little English and was traveling to Mexico, put
>> the infant in a plastic bin used to hold loose carry-on items for
>> security scanning at the busy airport Saturday morning.
>>
>> Security screeners saw the baby as it started to pass through, pulled
>> the bin out, and immediately sought medical assistance for the child,
>> Transportation Security Administration spokesman Nico Melendez said.
>>
>> The baby was examined at a local hospital and judged not to have
>> received a dangerous dose of radiation.
>>
>> "The lady obviously mistakenly put the baby in the machine. It was an
>> unfortunate incident," Melendez said.
>>
>> Airport officials said it was an innocent mistake by an inexperienced
>> traveler and only the second such incident there since 1988, when a
>> baby in a car seat went through an X-ray scanner.
>>
>> -------------------------------------
>> Sandy Perle
>> Senior Vice President, Technical Operations
>> Global Dosimetry Solutions, Inc.
>> 2652 McGaw Avenue
>> Irvine, CA 92614
> -------------- next part --------------
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.25/593 - Release Date: 12/19/2006
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 17:37:49 -0500
> From: "Muckerheide, Jim \(CDA\)" <Jim.Muckerheide at state.ma.us>
> Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] Infant goes through airport X-ray machine
> To: "Sandy Perle" <sandyfl at earthlink.net>, <radsafe at radlab.nl>,
> <jacobusj at ors.od.nih.gov>
> Message-ID:
> <819D4259707E404C934FBF454FF36AEE08BB32 at ES-MSG-002.es.govt.state.ma.us>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hmmm... This is exactly the msg ICRP/NCRP et al. have been sending for
> decades. And who says the public isn't educable?
>
> And if the TSA people know ANYTHING, its what they got in a typical
> mindless training course that government agencies send their people to
> run by the "train the trainers" people who went to the (very costly)
> Harvard School of Public Health, with training materials that were
> reviewed by agency managers to make sure none of the (small
> print/whispered) caveat footnotes at Harvard (for plausible deniability)
> got through the screening process!
>
> Regards, Jim
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl
>> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On Behalf Of Sandy Perle
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 5:15 PM
>> To: radsafe at radlab.nl; jacobusj at ors.od.nih.gov
>> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Infant goes through airport X-ray machine
>>
>> Received this courtesy of John Jacobus on another listserver:
>>
>> Note: The actions taken by TSA are beyond ridiculous. The X-ray
>> machines used for checked bags emits such an infinitesimally small
>> radiation exposure, significantly less than a chest x-ray. Yet they
>> send the baby to a hospital and consider whether the baby received a
>> "dangerous dose of radiation"! Guess you can pass film through the X-
>> tray unit and not be concerned that there will be any fogging, but be
>> concerned about a baby, knowing that there really is no dose! Look at
>> the message this sends all of the other passengers, hospital
>> personnel, EMT personnel, etc.!
>>
>> Story Highlights
>> o Grandmother leaves infant in plastic bin at airport X-ray machine
>> o Baby goes through machine at Los Angeles International Airport
>> o Baby checked out at hospital and is fine
>>
>> LOS ANGELES, California (Reuters) --
>>
>> A woman sent her 1-month-old grandson through an X-ray machine at Los
>> Angeles International Airport, security officials said Wednesday.
>>
>> The woman, who spoke little English and was traveling to Mexico, put
>> the infant in a plastic bin used to hold loose carry-on items for
>> security scanning at the busy airport Saturday morning.
>>
>> Security screeners saw the baby as it started to pass through, pulled
>> the bin out, and immediately sought medical assistance for the child,
>> Transportation Security Administration spokesman Nico Melendez said.
>>
>> The baby was examined at a local hospital and judged not to have
>> received a dangerous dose of radiation.
>>
>> "The lady obviously mistakenly put the baby in the machine. It was an
>> unfortunate incident," Melendez said.
>>
>> Airport officials said it was an innocent mistake by an inexperienced
>> traveler and only the second such incident there since 1988, when a
>> baby in a car seat went through an X-ray scanner.
>>
>> -------------------------------------
>> Sandy Perle
>> Senior Vice President, Technical Operations
>> Global Dosimetry Solutions, Inc.
>> 2652 McGaw Avenue
>> Irvine, CA 92614
>>
>> Tel: (949) 296-2306 / (888) 437-1714 Extension 2306
>> Fax:(949) 296-1144
>>
>> E-Mail: sperle at dosimetry.com
>> E-Mail: sandyfl at earthlink.net
>>
>> Global Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com/
>> Personal Website: http://sandy-travels.com/
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 17:49:38 EST
> From: LNMolino at aol.com
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Infant goes through airport X-ray machine
> To: sandyfl at earthlink.net, radsafe at radlab.nl
> Message-ID: <bd6.c674dcb.32bb1802 at aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
>
>
> In a message dated 12/20/2006 4:19:51 P.M. Central Standard Time,
> sandyfl at earthlink.net writes:
>
> Received this courtesy of John Jacobus on another listserver:
>
> Note: The actions taken by TSA are beyond ridiculous. The X-ray machines
> used for checked bags emits such an infinitesimally small radiation exposure,
> significantly less than a chest x-ray. Yet they send the baby to a hospital and
> consider whether the baby received a "dangerous dose of radiation"! Guess
> you can pass film through the X-tray unit and not be concerned that there will
> be any fogging, but be concerned about a baby, knowing that there really is
> no dose! Look at the message this sends all of the other passengers, hospital
> personnel, EMT personnel, etc.!
>
> While I agree with you 100% + the fact is they would be condemned if they
> had NOT taken the kid to the hospital.
>
> Dammed by another set of folks (Anti-Nukes, etc.) that have LONG used the
> stuff of science fiction movies to "teach" radiation science to their peers and
> frankly their peer group is the man on the street and he buys what they sell.
>
> I would love to defend my fellow First Responders but alas I know way too
> many folks that wear badges that even after good solid training tend to think
> more like the 15 year olds did in 1950 when ever after watching some cheesy
> sci-fi movie as to the effects of radiation on humans and the like.
>
> A sad statement but a true statement none the less.
>
>
> Louis N. Molino, Sr., CET
> FF/NREMT-B/FSI/EMSI
> Freelance Consultant/Trainer/Author/Journalist/Fire Protection Consultant
>
> LNMolino at aol.com
>
> 979-412-0890 (Cell Phone)
> 979-361-4636 (Home Phone)
> 979-690-7559 (IFW/TFW/FSS Office)
> 979-690-7562 (IFW/TFW/FSS Fax)
>
> "A Texan with a Jersey Attitude"
>
> "Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds
> discuss people" Eleanor Roosevelt - US diplomat & reformer (1884 - 1962)
>
> The comments contained in this E-mail are the opinions of the author and the
> author alone. I in no way ever intend to speak for any person or
> organization that I am in any way whatsoever involved or associated with unless I
> specifically state that I am doing so. Further this E-mail is intended only for its
> stated recipient and may contain private and or confidential materials
> retransmission is strictly prohibited unless placed in the public domain by the
> original author.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 23:00:36 +0000
> From: " Sandy Perle " <sandyfl at earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Infant goes through airport X-ray machine
> To: LNMolino at aol.com, radsafe at radlab.nl
> Message-ID:
> <1492319349-1166655676-cardhu_blackberry.rim.net-1360025764- at bxe011-cell01.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain
>
> Luis,
>
> Probably true. But why put the grandmother through further trauma. It was she who put the baby in the bin in the first place.
>
> TSA should have reacted better after the incident.
>
> Regards,
>
> Sandy
>
> Sent via BlackBerry from Cingular Wireless
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 18:27:52 EST
> From: LNMolino at aol.com
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Infant goes through airport X-ray machine
> To: sandyfl at earthlink.net, radsafe at radlab.nl
> Message-ID: <329.1078ef82.32bb20f8 at aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
>
>
> In a message dated 12/20/2006 5:10:03 P.M. Central Standard Time,
> sandyfl at earthlink.net writes:
>
> TSA should have reacted better after the incident.
>
>
> Well I'll keep my opinions about TSA to myself as I travel a lot. But that
> said, there is a reason that the three letters TSA illicit a LOT of jokes
> among the comedy circuit all the way to the Jay Leno, David Letterman leagues.
>
> LNM
>
> Louis N. Molino, Sr., CET
> FF/NREMT-B/FSI/EMSI
> Freelance Consultant/Trainer/Author/Journalist/Fire Protection Consultant
>
> LNMolino at aol.com
>
> 979-412-0890 (Cell Phone)
> 979-361-4636 (Home Phone)
> 979-690-7559 (IFW/TFW/FSS Office)
> 979-690-7562 (IFW/TFW/FSS Fax)
>
> "A Texan with a Jersey Attitude"
>
> "Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds
> discuss people" Eleanor Roosevelt - US diplomat & reformer (1884 - 1962)
>
> The comments contained in this E-mail are the opinions of the author and the
> author alone. I in no way ever intend to speak for any person or
> organization that I am in any way whatsoever involved or associated with unless I
> specifically state that I am doing so. Further this E-mail is intended only for its
> stated recipient and may contain private and or confidential materials
> retransmission is strictly prohibited unless placed in the public domain by the
> original author.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> radsafe mailing list
> radsafe at radlab.nl
> http://lists.radlab.nl/mailman/listinfo/radsafe
>
>
> End of radsafe Digest, Vol 74, Issue 7
> **************************************
>
>
>
>
More information about the RadSafe
mailing list