[ RadSafe ] Chris Busby physicists annd chemists
C.Busby at ulster.ac.uk
Sun Apr 24 10:58:05 CDT 2011
It is fascinating and alarming that you do not even know the scientific source of your own health physics risk model.
How can that be? Did you think your equations were delivered on Mount Sinai to Moses?
From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Steven Dapra
Sent: Fri 22/04/2011 14:45
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Chris Busby physicists annd chemists
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.
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?
>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
> How is it a contradiction in terms? You
>are NOT a health physicist. You are a chemist, in case you have forgotten.
>At 12:27 PM 4/21/2011, you wrote:
> >I am not a health physicist. This is a contradiction in terms
> >-----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
> > For all we know, Busby may be the best
> > chemist in the UK. He is not a health physicist.
> >Steven Dapra
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
More information about the RadSafe