[ RadSafe ] bakscatter x-ray

[Jeff Terry]

I am already working on that today. We are x-raying pepto bismo to see if we can recommend painting everyone's underwear
pink. Should work as a temporary tattoo as well without needing to dip into lab chemicals. It is always better to screw with TSA with over the counter products.  

The ultra strength has over 500 mg of Bi subsalicylate per 15 ml. 

Our other suggestion is going to be to wear an athletic cup, a 1/4 inch of ABS plastic should let you walk through the metal detectors, yet still play havoc with the backscatter machines. 

I think that our measurements are looking good. We will be preparing our website for recommendations shortly.

No concern on our part about the radiation, just the civil liberties. 

Jeff

Jeff Terry
Asst. Professor of Physics
Life Science Bldg Rm 166
Illinois Institute of Technology
3101 S. Dearborn St. 
Chicago IL 60616
630-252-9708
terryj at iit.edu




On Nov 17, 2010, at 7:56 PM, Cary Renquist wrote:

> 
> I took a quick look at one of the papers that they cite for dose per
> scan data... The paper was by some researchers at John Hopkins U. 
> 
> (Been a long time since I have played with x-rays and I have never dealt
> with 50 kVp x-rays)
> Their list of equipment for dose measurement was a large ion chamber
> (1800 cm^3 volume) and a Thermo Sci. (Bicron) micro-rem survey meter.
> Neither of those seem especially appropriate for rigorously
> characterizing the dose from such a low energy x-ray source.
> Particularly where the concern might be entrance dose.
> 
> As I indicated above, I took a really quick look -- haven't read the
> experimental protocol/analysis or any of the other papers that are
> available.  
> They can be downloaded from the TSA site: TSA Electronic reading room
> http://j.mp/92qzyT
> 
> Probably a good read for my flight back home for Thanksgiving...
> (perhaps I should grab some heavy metal carrier solution from the lab
> (bismuth?/barium?) and paint a smiley face on my skin)
> 
> Best regards,
> Cary
> 
> ---
> Cary Renquist
> cary.renquist at ezag.com
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Brennan, Mike
> (DOH)
> Sent: Tuesday, 16 November 2010 08:53
> To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] bakscatter x-ray
> 
> X-ray isn't my corner of the rad world, but the more I think about the "
> The majority of their energy is delivered to the skin and the underlying
> tissue. Thus, while the dose would be safe if it were distributed
> throughout the volume of the entire body, the dose to the skin may be
> dangerously high." Statement, the less sense it makes to me.  It seems
> to me that for any x-ray the majority of the absorption is in first
> dense material it encounters; the skin.  It also seems to me that if one
> set up detectors to collect and process the backscatter from a
> diagnostic x-ray procedure, you could image the target's skin through
> their clothing (though this would be far more difficult than just asking
> them to take it off).  Unless someone can point out where I am wrong
> (and I well might be), it seems that this objection is without merit.   
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Brennan, Mike
> (DOH)
> Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 4:05 PM
> To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] bakscatter xray
> 
> If the majority of the energy is delivered to the skin, then wouldn't it
> follow that the majority of THAT energy is delivered to the outer layer
> or the skin; the layer of dead skin cells?  If the claim is that the
> radiation penetrates the dead layer, but is then deposited in the living
> tissue, I would think that there should be some support for that.  
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of conrad sherman
> Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2010 6:57 PM
> To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] bakscatter xray
> 
> here is the letter from ucsf and response
> 
> LETTER OF CONCERN
> 
> ...Snip.....
> 
> (28keV).The majority of their energy is delivered to the skin and the 
> Underlying tissue. Thus, while the dose would be safe if it were
> distributed 
> throughout the volume of the entire body, the dose to the skin may be 
> dangerously high.
> 
> ....Snip....
> _______________________________________________
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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