[ RadSafe ] Panel wants tighter radiation security
FEARP at upstate.edu
Wed Oct 17 08:27:06 CDT 2007
Now we are securing these sources at hospitals and I'm sure at research labs
and companies. It would be difficult but not impossible to access the
sources. If the sources were replaced, there would not need to be the
security. However many Americans still think that xrays make you
radioactive. Would the average terrorist (who is able to be talked into
believing that blowing yourself up is a good idea) be any more likely to
differentiate this? Would this make our hospitals more likely terrorist
Also, the machines that would be put in would use a large amount of
electrical power. On average much of this power would be generated using
fossil fuels. We would be replacing a unit which has a very minimal carbon
footprint with a machine that has a large carbon footprint. Meanwhile the
government is trying to decrease the use of fossil fuels!!!
Does the left hand know what the right hand is doing??
Health Physics Technologist
SUNY Upstate Medical University
Radiation Safety Office
750 E. Adams St.
Syracuse, NY 13210
fearp at upstate.edu
>>> Maury Siskel <maurysis at peoplepc.com> 10/15/07 7:18 PM >>>
In this connection, the BS Board is drafting regulations requiring that
one BSB agent will be fastened at all times to each of these machines.
These agents will serve eight hour shifts five days per week. They will
receive minimum training to emit the DeanScream Alarm if any attempt is
made to hijack a machine. The manning requirements will be arranged to
include individual 40 hour weeks, two weeks leave per year, and 26 weeks
sick leave per year. Average intelligence (Binet IQ Survey) and an 8th
grade level education are required.
If you think the above is funny, please review the Federal Regulations
governing residential toilet tank size and the allowable flow rate on
residential shower heads. Note also the allowable limits for breath
alcohol, carbon dioxide, and the gasoline content of domestic ethynol..
Also, the new rules of acceptable court evidence will include: "Rules
of circumstantial evidence will be regarded hereafter as very strong; as
when catfish are found in milk".
And so on and on ...
Maury&Dog (Maury Siskel maurysis at peoplepc.cm)
BLHamrick at aol.com wrote:
>We may all think this is ridiculous (I know I do), but it may be reality
>soon. Congress can't fix the real problem (i.e., how to stop an actual
>weapon), so they (and the executive agencies, which are all dependent on
>funding appropriated by Congress) focus on things they think they can
>whether they're a real public danger or not, because it will look like
>doing something...at least to the vast majority of the public who have
>brainwashed into believing the myths about the unique and terrifying
>Barbara L. Hamrick
>In a message dated 10/11/2007 11:13:15 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
>sandyfl at cox.net writes:
>Ridiculous or WHAT!!!
>Panel wants tighter radiation security
>WASHINGTON (AP) Oct 9 - The U.S. government should replace more than
>1,000 irradiation machines used in hospitals and research facilities
>because terrorists could use the radioactive materials inside to make
>a "dirty" bomb, a government advisory panel has concluded.
>"Any one of these 1,000-plus sources could shut down 25 square
>kilometers, anywhere in the United States, for 40-plus years,"
>according to panel documents obtained by The Associated Press.
>The machines are in relatively unprotected locations such as
>hospitals and research facilities all over the country, and may be a
>tempting source of radioactive materials for terrorists who want
>bombs that explode and disperse radioactive debris over a large area,
>rendering it uninhabitable, the board found.
>The irradiators contain Cesium-137, one of the most dangerous and
>long-lasting radioactive materials. They are used for radiation
>therapy and to sterilize blood and food.
>Swapping the Cesium irradiators for X-ray machines or irradiators
>that use other materials would cost about $200 million over five
>years, but it would take the most accessible source of dangerous
>radioactive material inside the United States "off the table" for
>terrorists, the panel says.
>The recommendation is part of an as-yet-unreleased report that
>describes how unfriendly nations or terrorist groups could undermine
>the computers and satellites the U.S. military relies on and attack
>the United States with radiological or biological weapons or
>blackmail the U.S. government with a threat of a nuclear detonation,
>all while manipulating world opinion against the United States in the
>media and on the Internet.
>The report comes from the Defense Science Board, a panel of retired
>military and CIA officials and defense industry experts who offer the
>Pentagon possible solutions to actual and potential national security
>problems. It is expected to be released late this year.
>The board wants the Pentagon to create a joint military force able to
>locate and seize illicit nuclear materials and weapons when they are
>still in transit, and to safely destroy nuclear weapons captured from
>terrorists or defeated states.
>It says U.S. intelligence has failed to determine what countries or
>groups are developing or trying to obtain nuclear, radiological and
>biological weapons and how and when they are likely to use them.
>"No adversary can exercise all options; but we don't know which
>options they can exercise," the documents state.
>The report recommends creating "unfettered X-treme intelligence
>teams" to improve the "poor intelligence community posture." Exactly
>what the teams would do is classified.
>The board advocates diplomacy and trying to influence world opinion
>so the United States is less likely to be attacked or lured into a
>foreign war it might not win.
>"We are unprepared," state the documents. "At best we will be
>deterred. Worse, we will enter the fray and then quit when we
>appreciate the cost of success. Instruments of national power other
>than the military, such as strategic communication, will assume
>The U.S government should be promoting universally accepted values
>like human dignity, economic well-being, health care and education
>rather than "democracy" and "freedom," the panel states.
>"What we say is often not what others may hear __ concepts such as
>'democracy,' 'rule of law' and 'freedom' have different meanings in
>different cultures and at different stages of their development," the
>documents state. "It is about them, not only about us."
>It recommends that the State Department spend $250 million over five
>years to create an independent "Center for Global Engagement" to
>conduct opinion research and analyses on media and culture that the
>government can use to design projects and messages that will advance
>It also recommends deploying more hospital ships for medical and
>humanitarian relief; releasing spy imagery to help other countries in
>crop management, weather forecasting, and environmental studies; and
>adopting policies that will help create jobs in key strategic nations
>such as Lebanon, Pakistan and Iraq.
>************************************** See what's new at
>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:
>For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
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:
For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
More information about the RadSafe