The Tooth Fairy project

[Holloway3@aol.com]

In a message dated 8/10/00 9:01:22 AM Pacific Daylight Time, Norm Cohen 
writes:

<< When we had this discussion about the Tooth Fairy Project a few months 
ago, this  line of reasoning was brought up and rejected. The fallout 
argument is not
 sufficient because Sr-90 levels in baby teeth should be going down if the 
Sr-90 was
 from fallout. Sr-90 levels in teeth in the Toms River area are at levels 
equivalent
 to teeth tested in the late 1950s, when above ground testing was at its 
height. The
 point of the TFP is: if the Sr90 can not be attributed to  fallout, because 
with half-lives, the amount of Sr90 should now be mininal, where is the rest 
of the Sr90 being found in teeth coming from? The only answer I can see is 
that it comes from nuclear reactors, perhaps a little leakage from 
underground testing, and weapons labs. >>

Norm,

I think that you will find that Sr-90 peaked in the environment in the early 
1960s, not in the late 1950s, as you say.  The significance of this is that 
teeth collected in the late 1950s may not be a suitable yardstick for 
comparison with teeth collected today, as you imply.  The Soviets and the 
U.S. exploded an enormous number of nuclear weapons in the atmosphere in the 
early 60s, just prior to the atmospheric test ban treaty.  This added 
inventory may very well have contributed to the relatively high (compared to 
the late 50s) level of Sr-90 in recent teeth.  In addition, rainfall patterns 
can play an important role in removing radioactive materials from the 
atmosphere, so that the levels of  fallout are not uniform around the 
country.  Comparing Sr-90 in teeth,  as you are trying to do, is a more 
complex chore than you realize. 
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html