I suggest that BERT is the best way to explain dose to the public.

[John Cameron <jrcamero@facstaff.wisc.edu>]

Title: I suggest that BERT is the best way to explain dose to

Reply to Schoenhofer and Andrews:

 franz schoenhofer wrote:

My conclusion: When speaking to the public or to the journalists - do not

use mrem, mSv, pCi, MCi, fBq or TBq. Compare everything to well known"standards

John Andrews wrote:

I disagree with your recommendation NOT to use radiation units.  These should always be used properly, and then explained in terms of easily understood common radiation exposure situations.  The press and journalists should be cautioned to use both in their reporting, not just the common comparison values.

I have been promoting "background equivalent radiation time" or BERT as simple approach to explaining radiation dose to a person for about twelve years. The BERT  approach is explained in my  article "Are x-rays Safe?" which is available on the University of Florida web site at : www.medinfo.ufl.edu/other/cameron/rads.html. If you have questions contact me. The European community is also using the concept. See Radiation Protection 118  Referral guidelines for imaging (p. 18) [Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2001 (http://europa.eu.int)

        I agree with Schoenhofer but there are no "well known standards" that are understandable to the general public.  I don't understand John Andrews "common radiation exposure situations" Most of the public do not want a lecture on radiation protection quantities.

        If all medical users of radiation (radiographers, dental hygienists,etc.) would explain the patients dose in terms of the time to get the same effective dose from background, it would help reduce radiation phobia.

Best wishes, John Cameron

--
John R. Cameron (jrcamero@facstaff.wisc.edu)
2678 SW 14th St. Gainesville, FL 32608
(352) 371-9865 Fax (352) 371-9866
(until May 2002)

PO Box 405, Lone Rock,WI 53556
(608) 583-2160; Fax (608) 583-2269
May 2002- October 2002