# [ RadSafe ] New Fukushima-related paper

Wed Sep 7 09:15:05 CDT 2011

```
Hi Bobby,

"For example, if the

cell lethality probability per cell at risk (for a specific cell type) is

0.1 (i.e., 1 in 10 cells) at a given gamma dose, then the

corresponding probability for simultaneously killing 1 million of

these cells with the same dose is 0.1 , which is essentially

zero."

My sense tells me that if the probability of death per cell at risk is 0.1, this is based on someone's observation that 10% of the cells were killed at a given gamma dose.  The (likely) number of cells killed (I'm not sure how "simultaneously" fits in - and I don't see that in the paper), then would be 0.1 multiplied by the number of cells irradiated.  Perhaps the paper is missing the number of cells irradiated...  I think what you calculated is the likelihood that for 1 million irradiated cells, the likelihood that they all would [simultaneously] die.  For irradiation of 1 million cells, you would expect 100,000 cell deaths... As I read your words multiple times, I'm not sure that they are untrue, but they seem misleading.

"For example, if the

cell lethality probability per cell at risk (for a specific cell type) is

0.1 (i.e., 1 in 10 cells) at a given gamma dose, then the

corresponding probability for simultaneously killing 1 million of

these cells with the same dose is 0.1 , which is essentially

zero."

My sense tells me that if the probability of death per cell at risk is 0.1, this is based on someone's observation that 10% of the cells were killed at a given gamma dose.  The (likely) number of cells killed (I'm not sure how "simultaneously" fits in - and I don't see that in the paper), then would be 0.1 multiplied by the number of cells irradiated.  Perhaps the paper is missing the number of cells irradiated...  I think what you calculated is the likelihood that for 1 million irradiated cells, the likelihood that they all would [simultaneously] die.  For irradiation of 1 million cells, you would expect 100,000 cell deaths... As I read your words multiple times, I'm not sure that they are untrue, but they seem misleading.

Thanks for provoking my thoughts,

Cindy (Bloom)

----- Original Message -----

From: "Bobby Scott" <BScott at lrri.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2011 5:05:04 PM
Subject: [ RadSafe ] New Fukushima-related paper

Hi All:

A link to my new paper titled "A guide to radiation hazard evaluation,
applied to Fukushima recovery workers" follows:

http://www.jpands.org/vol16no3/scott.pdf

The paper was just published in the Journal of American Physicians and
Surgeons (Vol. 16, #3, pages 71-76, 2011). I thought the paper may be of
interest to some of you.

Best wishes,
Bobby R. Scott, Ph.D.
Senior Scientist
Lovelace Respiratory Research Institute
2425 Ridgecrest Drive SE
Albuquerque, NM 87108 USA

*******************************************************************************

This e-mail and any files are protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy
Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521. Its intended to be delivered only to the named
addressee(s) and its content is confidential and privileged. If you are not the
intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the e-mail to the
intended recipient, be advised that you have received this e-mail in error and
that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender
by replying to this message and delete this e-mail immediately. Nothing in this
communication, either written or implied, constitutes or should be construed as a
legally binding agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter
herein.
_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list