[ RadSafe ] Chris Busby physicists annd chemists

[Steven Dapra]

April 22

         The term "health physics" was coined 
during the Manhattan Project.  Hence, it's been 
used for over 65 years.  You are going to 
single-handedly overturn an expression that has 
been used for this long?  I have never heard 
anyone objecting to this term, not even the 
fanatical anti-nukers I've encountered over some 35 years.

         The ICRP model is not 'my' model.  I 
don't even know that the ICRP has a model and I 
certainly don't know what it is.

         You wrote, "Did you know what happens at 
a decay position in ionisation when a dipositive 
ion of one element turns suiddenly into a 
tripositive element of another element? Do you 
think that matters? Its  not factored into ICRP as a dose. Why?"

         What is this supposed to mean?  Does it 
matter if an element turns into an element of 
another element?  Is it supposed to be factored 
into ICRP as a dose?  If you want to know why the 
ICRP does what it does (or doesn't do) why not 
write the ICRP and ask.  No one here is a 
spokesman for the ICRP.  It seems to me that you are barking up the wrong tree.

         All of your pretentious mumbo-jumbo does 
nothing to alter the fact that you are not a health physicist.

Steven Dapra


At 03:28 AM 4/22/2011, you wrote:
>I mean that health physicist is a contradiction in terms.
>You cannot apply physics to human health.
>Biological systems are too complex to be dealt 
>with in some primitive stress/strain way as if 
>they are pieces of wire being stretched. This is what your ICRP model does.
>The physical chemistry of dilute solution 
>molecular interactions at the living system 
>molecule level is where you have to begin. I 
>mean, do you even knopw what an affinity 
>constant is and how to measure it? Im not saying 
>you should know, you will not have been taught 
>it. I have talked with a lot of health 
>physicists (and physicists in this area). They 
>know no chemistry and see the field as some 
>applied mathematics domain. But it is very 
>important to know these things or you get it 
>wrong. Did you know what happens at a decay 
>position in ionisation when a dipositive ion of 
>one element turns suiddenly into a tripositive 
>element of another element? Do you think that 
>matters? Its  not factored into ICRP as a dose. Why?
>Chris
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Steven Dapra
>Sent: Fri 22/04/2011 01:21
>To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
>Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Chris Busby
>
>April 21
>
>          How is it a contradiction in terms?  You
>are NOT a health physicist.  You are a chemist, in case you have forgotten.
>
>Steven Dapra
>
>
>At 12:27 PM 4/21/2011, you wrote:
>
> >I am not a health physicist. This is a contradiction in terms
> >Sincerely
> >Chris
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Franta, Jaroslav
> >Sent: Thu 21/04/2011 14:32
> >To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) MailingList
> >Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Chris Busby
> >
> >UNRESTRICTED | ILLIMITÉ
> >
> ><snip>
> >          For all we know, Busby may be the best
> > chemist in the UK.  He is not a health physicist.
> >
> >Steven Dapra
>
>[edit]