[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Dental radiology; xeroradiography
<<I think we all agree that if we can reduce unnecessary radiation exposure
at no cost, then we should do so. This has nothing to do with LNT. It is
just common sense.>>
It obviously has everything to do w/ LNT. It's "unnecessary" for us to eat a
well-balanced diet and exercise, but doing it isn't a bad idea. I don't
exactly rush through the plant when I go over for an inspection, but I don't
loiter either, but only because it's a waste of work time and in violation
of federal regulations and plant procedures.
Jack Earley
Radiological Engineer
-----Original Message-----
From: Gibbs, S Julian [mailto:s.julian.gibbs@vanderbilt.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 7:38 PM
To: Radsafe Mail list
Subject: Dental radiology; xeroradiography
The arguments that newer faster dental films produce inferior
images are based on the same sort of reasoning as the LNT
hypothesis. Conversely, several well-conducted studies have
compared performance of D-speed films (the standard since the
1950s) with E-speed, for a variety of diagnostic tasks. All show
no significant differences. F-speed film is new; studies are under
way but not finished. The costs of all three film types are
comparable and in most cases identical. Thus there is nothing to
lose from use of faster films, and there may be some gain. I think
we all agree that if we can reduce unnecessary radiation exposure
at no cost, then we should do so. This has nothing to do with LNT.
It is just common sense.
Xeroradiography fell into disfavor for mammorgraphy (or any other
diagnostic imaging) largely because the equipment was so
unreliable. The standard joke in radiology departments was that if
one wants to use xeroradiography, one must purchase at least two
units in order to have a 50% chance that one would be working when
needed. The manufacturer seemed unable to correct the problems.
The xero images were good, but modern screen-film images are
equally suitable for the diagnostic task.
We must remember that for both dental radiography and mammography
image quality is judged on the basis of diagnostic information, not
esthetic quality.
***********************************************************
S. Julian Gibbs, DDS, PhD Voice: 615-322-1477
Professor, Emeritus
Dept. of Radiology & Radiological Sciences
Vanderbilt University Medical Center Home: 615-356-3615
209 Oxford House Email:s.julian.gibbs@vanderbilt.edu
Nashville TN 37232-4245 or alias:j.gibbs@vanderbilt.edu
***********************************************************
************************************************************************
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/
************************************************************************
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/