[ RadSafe ] Re: GM tubes detecting alphas
Mark Sonter
sontermj at tpg.com.au
Thu Dec 21 06:04:06 CST 2006
GM detectors can pick up alphas, but only if fitted with very thin mica
or beryllium windows, less than a couple gm/cm2 thickness. There are
several pancake GM detectors on the market that claim to be alpha as
well as beta and gamma detectors, but they have pretty low alpha
detection efficiency....
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