[ RadSafe ] Deadly embrace: NRC policy can expose childrento radioactivit...

BLHamrick at aol.com BLHamrick at aol.com
Mon Jan 5 20:16:48 CST 2009

If you look at NUREG 1556, Vol. 9, Rev. 2, Appendix U, they have a table  for 
release of patients, which roughly correlates a release at 33 mCi with 7  
mrem per hour at a meter, so let's just say 330 mCi and 70 mrem per hour at a  
meter, then approximate with 7 - 8 mrem per hour at 10 feet, but there's some  
internal dose to account for as well.  I'm not sure that was factored into  the 
NUREG's table to basically come up with a residual activity in the body, of  
which some fraction of the theoretical dose (500 mrem) to friends and  family 
(in some idealized situation) is from internal dose.
In any case, the real dose to family members will vary considerably,  
depending on the patient's excretion of the dose, and dependent upon the  patient's 
willingness and ability to conform to the doctor's  instructions.
No judgement here.  Just wanted to get you in the ballpark on the dose  issue.
In a message dated 1/5/2009 5:53:48 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,  sjd at swcp.com 

Jan.  5

True, however I would like to know  how much exposure will be 
received by a person within ten feet for 24  hours.

Steven Dapra

At 09:51 AM 1/5/09 -0800, Brennan,  Mike  (DOH) wrote:
>I don't offer opinions on legal issues without  acknowledging that I am
>not an expert and might be wrong; it is a shame  this lawyer does not
>exercise the same care when making pronouncements  about radiation
>issues.  While there are a number of questionable  statements in this
>column, the lead off sentence it the worst: Just one  kiss from a patient
>treated with the radioactive isotope iodine 131  (I-131) can double a
>child's risk of thyroid cancer, according to the  authoritative
>International Commission on Radiation Protection."   If a (presumably
>adult) patient is swapping significant amounts of spit  with a child,
>there are other, more pressing, issues that need to be  addressed.
>-----Original Message-----
>From:  radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On
>Behalf  Of Steven Dapra
>Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 4:07 PM
>To:  radsafe at radlab.nl
>Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Deadly embrace: NRC policy  can expose
>childrento radioactivity, by  retired........
>Jan. 3
>       The PDF link posted by Celia is an article of approximately  600
>words written by Peter Crane, a retired NRC counsel.  It was  published
>in the New Hampshire Sentinel Source, the online edition of  the Keene
>(NH) Sentinel.
>         Crane claims that the NRC instituted a "deregulation" of  I-131,
>and did so "at the behest of providers and insurers, eager to  cut costs
>and increase profits."  (Presumably Crane means health  care providers.)
>He says that (unspecified)  "international safety  standards" call for
>hospitalizing patients given more than 30  millicuries of I-131, but that
>in the US, patients are being sent home  with "as much as 400 millicuries
>I-131 in their  systems."
>          Let us assume that  a patient is sent home with 400 millicuries,
>and that a family member  is within 10 feet of this patient at all times.
>In 24 hours what will  the exposure be to that family member?
>Steven  Dapra
>sjd at swcp.com
>At 03:50 PM 1/3/09 +0000,  Celia wrote:
> >In the news - FYI
> >
>  >celia

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 visit: 

**************New year...new news.  Be the first to know what is making 
headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026)

More information about the RadSafe mailing list