Re: radon and smoking

[BERNARD L COHEN <blc+@PITT.EDU>]

On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Field, R. William wrote:



> At 11:53 AM 2/14/2002 -0500, BERNARD L COHEN wrote:

>

>       --The thing being left out of your consideration is the

>       unattached

>       fraction. Unattached radon progeny have a much better chance of

>       stickung

>       in the bronchial region, and this fraction is greatly reduced

>       by cigarette

>       smoke.

>



	--I sent that message in a reply to Ruth's message when it came up

on my e-mail, which was before your message came up. If your message had

come up, I wouldn't have sent mine.



>

>

> As in my reply to John,

>

> That is what I meant by reducing the effective dose.  "There are really at

> least two factors at work.  You have the aerosol generation from the smoke

> which keeps the progeny in the air longer, but on the other hand the

> progeny now becomes attached to larger particles which reduces the

> effective dose.  In this case in a round about way, smoke filled air just

> as a dusty houses reduces the effective dose from radon from ground

> sources.  Of course you still have the polonium-210 from the tobacco."

>

> Bill Field

>

>



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

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. You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/