[ RadSafe ] help

Wed Apr 7 13:39:56 CDT 2010

--------------------------------------------------
From: <radsafe-request at health.phys.iit.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 7:00 PM
To: <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Subject: RadSafe Digest, Vol 265, Issue 1

> Send RadSafe mailing list submissions to
> radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/radsafe
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> radsafe-request at health.phys.iit.edu
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> radsafe-owner at health.phys.iit.edu
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of RadSafe digest..."
>
>
> Important!
>
> To keep threads/discussions more easily readable PLEASE observe the 
> following guideline when replying to a message or digest:
>
> 1. When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of radsafe digest ..."
> 2. Do NOT include the entire digest in your reply. Include ONLY the 
> germane sentences to which you're responding.
>
> Thanks!_______________________________________________
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: Proposed NRC Regulation open for comment (Dan)
>   2. coal ash toxicity contribution from uranyl (James Salsman)
>   3. Re: coal ash toxicity contribution from uranyl (Dan)
>   4. Re: coal ash toxicity contribution from uranyl (James Salsman)
>   5. Photos of Inside of Russian Smolensk Power Plant (Roger Helbig)
>   6. Re: coal ash toxicity contribution from uranyl (Bjorn Cedervall)
>   7. Salsman warning (garyi at trinityphysics.com)
>   8. In need of Ludlum Model 43-93's (Robert J. Gunter)
>   9. Re: Salsman warning (Doug Huffman)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 14:09:53 -0600
> From: Dan <hotgreenchile at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Proposed NRC Regulation open for comment
> To: Daniel Kane <dankane at mindspring.com>
> Cc: "<radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>" <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> Message-ID: <E5095CFB-4F39-4440-8BC9-AE018D55E241 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>
> Does anyone have the contact information for the other Dan Kane, an
> engineer in Las Vegas?
>
> Dan ii
>
> Dan W McCarn
> HotGreenChile at gmail.com
> +1-505-310-3922
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 5, 2010, at 9:42 AM, "Daniel Kane" <dankane at mindspring.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Just to clarify -
>>
>> I am not the petitioner, my specialty is nuclear medicine physics.
>>
>> Dan Kane
>> Associates in Medical Physics, LLC
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
>> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Bill Rowan
>> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 10:39 AM
>> To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
>> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Proposed NRC Regulation open for comment
>>
>> NRC has just published a petition for rulemaking open for public
>> comment at
>> WWW.Regulations.Gov identified by searching NRC-2010-0088.
>>
>>
>>
>> Petitioner Dan Kane requests: the petitioner requests that the
>> provisions
>> that govern temporary storage of spent fuel after cessation of reactor
>> operation be revoked, that licensing of new nuclear power plants
>> cease, and
>> that existing operating nuclear power  plants be phased out. The
>> petitioner
>> believes these suggestions are necessary until the NRC can be
>> assured of the
>> technical and economic certainties of a waste disposition decision and
>> associated political certainties in light of the current
>> administration's
>> proposed defunding of the Yucca Mountain Repository for permanent
>> disposal
>> and storage of spent nuclear fuel.
>>
>>
>>
>> Just passing the information along for those that want to weigh-in.
>>
>> Bill Rowan
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>>
>> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other
>> settings visit:
>> http://health.phys.iit.edu
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>>
>> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other
>> settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 16:49:05 -0700
> From: James Salsman <jsalsman at gmail.com>
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] coal ash toxicity contribution from uranyl
> To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
> Message-ID:
> <n2ya3c2bd6c1004051649zf427c77ay81fbc754c66ad842 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> How much of the toxicity of coal fly ash is due to uranyl?
>
> Jones, T. et al (2009) "The geochemistry and bioreactivity of fly-ash
> from coal-burning power stations" Biomarkers  14(S1):45-8 states
> "Fly-ash is a recognized bioreactive material in rat lung, generating
> hydroxyl radicals, releasing iron, and causing DNA damage. However,
> the mechanisms of the bioreactivity are still unclear and the relative
> contributions of the minerals and leachable metals to that toxicity
> are not well known." -- http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19604058  /
> http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a913225205
>
> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste
> suggests it might be a very substantial portion.
>
> What are the other top genotoxins in coal ash?
>
> Which is the best source measuring the combined chemical and
> radiological carcinogenicity of uranyl?
>
> Sincerely,
> James Salsman
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 19:40:09 -0600
> From: Dan <hotgreenchile at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] coal ash toxicity contribution from uranyl
> To: James Salsman <jsalsman at gmail.com>
> Cc: "radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu" <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> Message-ID: <0436530B-4F6B-4B1B-9D5D-C2172C4901C8 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>
> In my opinion, like other heavy metals, you have to reach a
> "threshhold" before toxicity is exhibited. Take a look at Otto Raabe's
> new paper.
>
> Dan ii
>
> Dan W McCarn
> HotGreenChile at gmail.com
> +1-505-310-3922
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 5, 2010, at 5:49 PM, James Salsman <jsalsman at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> How much of the toxicity of coal fly ash is due to uranyl?
>>
>> Jones, T. et al (2009) "The geochemistry and bioreactivity of fly-ash
>> from coal-burning power stations" Biomarkers  14(S1):45-8 states
>> "Fly-ash is a recognized bioreactive material in rat lung, generating
>> hydroxyl radicals, releasing iron, and causing DNA damage. However,
>> the mechanisms of the bioreactivity are still unclear and the relative
>> contributions of the minerals and leachable metals to that toxicity
>> are not well known." -- http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19604058  /
>> http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a913225205
>>
>> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste
>> suggests it might be a very substantial portion.
>>
>> What are the other top genotoxins in coal ash?
>>
>> Which is the best source measuring the combined chemical and
>> radiological carcinogenicity of uranyl?
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> James Salsman
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>>
>> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other
>> settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 19:03:25 -0700
> From: James Salsman <jsalsman at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] coal ash toxicity contribution from uranyl
> To: Dan <hotgreenchile at gmail.com>
> Cc: "radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu" <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> Message-ID:
> <u2wa3c2bd6c1004051903k3a1b5185n917af31a4bb12ade at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 6:40 PM, Dan <hotgreenchile at gmail.com> wrote:
>> In my opinion, like other heavy metals, you have to reach a "threshhold"
>> before toxicity is exhibited.
>
> I'm not sure whether that's true of uranyl, which accumulates in
> various tissues.
>
>> Take a look at Otto Raabe's new paper.
>
> This one?
> http://journals.lww.com/health-physics/Abstract/2010/03000/Concerning_the_Health_Effects_of_Internally.6.aspx
>
> I'm not sure whether it applies to uranium intake, because uranyl's
> carcinogenicity due to its chemical toxicity is known to be much
> greater than its carcinogenicity due to radiological effects.
>
> Sincerely,
> James Salsman
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 02:57:58 -0700
> From: "Roger Helbig" <rhelbig at sfo.com>
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Photos of Inside of Russian Smolensk Power Plant
> To: "Radsafe" <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> Message-ID: <005901cad56f$a4d0e480$ee72ad80$@com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> There is extensive anti-nuclear posting on this website (Thai, perhaps) 
> that
> includes photos of Smolenk power plant and other things - it is worth
> looking at and commenting upon.
>
>
>
> http://www.praphansarn.com/new/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=11414
> <http://www.praphansarn.com/new/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=11414&get=last>
> &get=last
>
>
>
> Roger Helbig
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 14:01:19 +0000
> From: Bjorn Cedervall <bcradsafers at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] coal ash toxicity contribution from uranyl
> To: <jsalsman at gmail.com>
> Cc: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
> Message-ID: <SNT119-W226B7CD72112FCE36EFA8BA9180 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
> I question whether anything meaningful biological conclusions can be drawn 
> from this paper.
>
> Fly ash - isn't that a mix with elements from more than half of the 
> periodic system?
>
> To go from there and directly to specific mechanisms relating to DNA 
> damage (what kind of damage?) seems like a speculation.
>
>
>
> My personal comment only,
>
>
>
> Bjorn Cedervall   bcradsafers at hotmail.com
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>> Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 19:03:25 -0700
>> From: jsalsman at gmail.com
>> To: hotgreenchile at gmail.com
>> CC: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
>> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] coal ash toxicity contribution from uranyl
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 6:40 PM, Dan <hotgreenchile at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > In my opinion, like other heavy metals, you have to reach a 
>> > "threshhold"
>> > before toxicity is exhibited.
>>
>> I'm not sure whether that's true of uranyl, which accumulates in
>> various tissues.
>>
>> > Take a look at Otto Raabe's new paper.
>>
>> This one?
>> http://journals.lww.com/health-physics/Abstract/2010/03000/Concerning_the_Health_Effects_of_Internally.6.aspx
>>
>> I'm not sure whether it applies to uranium intake, because uranyl's
>> carcinogenicity due to its chemical toxicity is known to be much
>> greater than its carcinogenicity due to radiological effects.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> James Salsman
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your 
> inbox.
> http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 09:55:05 -0500
> From: garyi at trinityphysics.com
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Salsman warning
> To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
> Message-ID: <4BBB04F9.13812.2256AD1 at garyi.trinityphysics.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
> If you disagree with James, you should be prepared to defend your job.  He 
> sent a formal
> email to my employer with alegations of misconduct, and threatened to "go 
> public" if "this
> matter can not be resolved."  I know he has also used this tactic with 
> others.  No telling who
> he has successfully silenced.
>
> In my opinion, stooping to such despicable tactics is like debating with a 
> jihadist.  He might
> give you 5 minutes to convert, but if that fails its time for the 
> decapitation.
>
> But it is important that experts continue to refute James.  If he does try 
> to have anyone else
> fired, I will be more than happy to send a letter and provide 
> documentation of my own
> experience.  I am sure that others on Radsafe would also overwhelmingly 
> defend the experts
> that James might wish to attack.
>
> Have a nice day  ;)
> Gary Isenhower
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 11:10:42 -0400
> From: "Robert J. Gunter" <rjgunter at chpconsultants.com>
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] In need of Ludlum Model 43-93's
> To: <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> Message-ID: <004901cad59b$53ddea60$fb99bf20$@com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Greetings All,
>
> I am in need of some Ludlum Model 43-93's.  Please call or email if you 
> have
> any extras.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Rob
>
> Robert J. Gunter, CHP
> CHP Consultants
> rjgunter at chpconsultants.com
> www.chpconsultants.com
> www.chpdosimetry.com
> Tel:? +(865) 387-0028
> Fax:? +(866) 491-9913
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 10:23:31 -0500
> From: Doug Huffman <doug.huffman at wildblue.net>
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Salsman warning
> To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
> Message-ID: <4BBB51F3.3000707 at wildblue.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Formal e-mail beggars the meanings of formal and of e-mail.
>
> On 4/6/2010 09:55, garyi at trinityphysics.com wrote:
>> If you disagree with James, you should be prepared to defend your job. 
>> He sent a formal
>> email to my employer with alegations of misconduct, and threatened to "go 
>> public" if "this
>> matter can not be resolved."  I know he has also used this tactic with 
>> others.  No telling who
>> he has successfully silenced.
>>
>> In my opinion, stooping to such despicable tactics is like debating with 
>> a jihadist.  He might
>> give you 5 minutes to convert, but if that fails its time for the 
>> decapitation.
>>
>> But it is important that experts continue to refute James.  If he does 
>> try to have anyone else
>> fired, I will be more than happy to send a letter and provide 
>> documentation of my own
>> experience.  I am sure that others on Radsafe would also overwhelmingly 
>> defend the experts
>> that James might wish to attack.
>>
>> Have a nice day  ;)
>> Gary Isenhower
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>>
>> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings 
>> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> RadSafe mailing list
> RadSafe at health.phys.iit.edu
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/radsafe
>
>
> End of RadSafe Digest, Vol 265, Issue 1
> ***************************************
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
> signature database 5008 (20100407) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> 

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 5008 (20100407) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com