[ RadSafe ] Chris Busby

[Busby Chris]

John Salsman? 
Is that another insult?
Who is Salsman?
Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of bobcherry at satx.rr.com
Sent: Fri 22/04/2011 15:16
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List; The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing	List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Chris Busby
 
Chris Busby and John Salsman: Separated at birth?

---- Busby Chris <C.Busby at ulster.ac.uk> wrote: 
> 
> Dear Otto,
> 
> 1. Its is a comparison of two probabilities. "Very small" is not a quantitative measure. You have to compare the probability of a Y90 decay in 12 hours with the probability of the same cell getting 2 hits in 12 hours from the same dose of external radiation. However small the absolute probability for one atom sequence the number of atoms involved is very large (as the overall contamination goes up)  and so the product gives you the probability of a second event in the body/tissue. The probability of a second event from external is vanishingly small though calculable. There are 10^13 cells. The probability of two tracks from external is 1 in E-26. The probability from two tracks from Sr90 Y90 is a lot less (12 hr period and 64hr decay so the enhancement is about E+22 for a simngle atom, decay internal vs external.
> 
> 2. Not if they are bound to the DNA in condensed form. Furthermore, there is the ionisation change at the decay locus from transmutation. Sr++ to Y+++ is an ionisation. Then Y+++ to Zr is also an ionisation from transmutation redox. And even if it is very small (you can work it out on complete randomness into 4pi) it is not as small as E-26 and there are a lot of atoms.
> 
> 3. But why doesnt someone do the experiment?? 
> 
> C  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Otto G. Raabe
> Sent: Fri 22/04/2011 03:45
> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Chris Busby
>  
> At 12:28 PM 4/21/2011, Billwrote:
> >My apologies-I was looking at the 90Sr half-life not the 90Y half life. The
> >average time between decay events is 3.9 days. This is still a relatively
> >long time.
> ***********************
> That makes little difference.
> 
> The chance that the two beta particles, which would be expected have 
> widely different energies and ranges, will both go in the same 
> direction and hit the same target DNA is very, very  small anyway.
> 
> Otto
> 
> 
> **********************************************
> Prof. Otto G. Raabe, Ph.D., CHP
> Center for Health & the Environment
> University of California
> One Shields Avenue
> Davis, CA 95616
> E-Mail: ograabe at ucdavis.edu
> Phone: (530) 752-7754   FAX: (530) 758-6140
> *********************************************** 
> _______________________________________________
> 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