Re: Contaminated uranium in the news again

[BobCherry@AOL.COM]

In a message dated 6/25/01 11:15:50 AM Eastern Daylight Time, blc+@PITT.EDU 

writes:



<< > http://www.newsday.com/ap/text/national/ap165.htm

 > 

 > This is on AOL news today and elsewhere.  How bad is this contamination? 

 > Anybody know?

 > It would be nice to have the numbers so we could answer questions.

 

    Is this the same as the depleted uranium used by the military in

 Kosovo? If so, the amount of plutonium contamination is trivial, adding

 essentially nothing to the doses. >>



Dr. Cohen,



That is what I presumed when I provided my sarcastic remark earlier.



The USA article mentions an increase in dose rates due to TRU contamination 

of "roughly one percent." That is a journalistic trick. The Army found an 

increase of less than one percent in every sample. Most were on the order of 

0.1 percent and few were in the neighborhood of 0.5 percent. I asked that our 

press releases say "much less than one percent."  The "much" got deleted, so 

now the press says "roughly."



BobCherry@aol.com

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

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.