[ RadSafe ] Re: I131 patient during intercontinental flight

[Maury Siskel]

Congress reads?  Really? Great jumpin' butterballs! When did they start 
doing that? I thought all they did was distribute tax money and credit 
grown on credit farms.. Gosh, what a great revelation!  Maybe they will 
do something to encourage nuclear power ... or the expanded availability 
of nuclear medicine ... or ...
Cheers,
Maury&Dog
=====================

Glenn R. Marshall wrote:

>What if it's an important business trip, or a bank executive on his way to Vegas?  Assuming $2000/person-rem, maybe charge him $60 to make the trip.  The money can be added to some sort of big government stimulus package...
>
>Nobody in Congress reads this list, do they?
>
> 
>Glenn Marshall
>-----Original Message-----
>From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On Behalf Of Moshe Levita
>Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 10:28 AM
>To: radsafe at radlab.nl; Clayton J Bradt
>Subject: [ RadSafe ] Re: I131 patient during intercontinental flight
>
>If the patient on the flight has only 7 mc of I-131 in his body, he might 
>discharge some 1500 microcuries
>into the toilet during the flight. While contamination of 1 microcurie ' has 
>'  Effective Dose Equivalent
>of about 0.4 mSv, It seems that contamination is an issue....
>
>External exposure of his neighbor during the flight can be some 0.3 mSv ...
>
>Is this justified ?
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Clayton J Bradt" <cjb01 at health.state.ny.us>
>To: <radsafe at radlab.nl>
>Cc: <mlevita at tasmc.health.gov.il>
>Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 4:34 PM
>Subject: Re: I131 patient during intercontinental flight
>
>
>  
>
>>It might be easier to resolve this problem if we ignore that fact that the
>>patients' excretions are radioactive. Most readers on this list will agree
>>that after a fairly short time, the I-131 levels within the patient will 
>>be
>>low enough such that he/she poses no actual danger to others. So why not
>>suppose that these patients instead of excreting small amounts of I-131,
>>are rather excreting skunk scent. Not dangerous, but offensive to others.
>>What would be the ethically defensible protocol for releasing these
>>patients for mass transit?
>>
>>If we can answer this, I think we have answered the original question
>>posed.
>>
>>
>>**************************************************
>>
>>Message: 2
>>Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 10:21:52 +0200
>>From: "Moshe Levita" <mlevita at tasmc.health.gov.il>
>>Subject: [ RadSafe ] I131 patient during intercontinental flight
>>To: <radsafe at radlab.nl>
>>Message-ID: <002601c98a8f$764b1bc0$df83640a at tasmc.corp>
>>Content-Type: text/plain;            charset="windows-1255"
>>
>>Dear Colleagues,
>>
>>
>>
>>Many Iodine 131 patients arrives in Israel to be treated and then fly back
>>home.
>>
>>The patient stays in the award until the residual dose is below certain
>>level.
>>
>>(Residual activity is calculated by the measurement of dose rate at 1 m)
>>
>>
>>
>>I wonder at what residual activity it will be reasonable to allow the
>>patient to fly back to his country.
>>
>>
>>
>>One have to take into considerations :
>>
>>
>>
>>1.  Five hours flight of sitting beside another passenger (who might be a
>>child or pregnant women)
>>
>>2.  Definite contamination of the airplane toilet, toilet cleaning, toilet
>>disposal etc.
>>
>>3.  Possible triggering of airport radiation alarm monitors.
>>
>>
>>Any suggestion will be welcomed.
>>
>>
>>
>>Moshe Levita
>>
>>Chief Radiation Executive
>>
>>Ministry of Health
>>
>>Israel
>>    
>>