Did any HPs write a hormetic reassurance using BERT or DARI, which WSJ chose not to print?
Howard Long
John Cameron wrote:
Ruth & others: BERT (which I first suggested in 1989) is an acronym for Background Equivalent Radiation Time. It is a method of explaining radiation to patients or anyone else about the dose they received or will receive. The effective dose is converted into the time to get the same dose from background. There is a thorough discussion of it in my article Are X-rays Safe? I recommend using the U.S. "average" of 3 mSv/y, even though I don't believe in the lack of science used to calculate effective dose.The DARI is recent suggestion described in an article in Europhysics News http://www.europhysicsnews.com/full/13/article4/article4.html DARI is the internal dose in one year from K-40 in the body-an acronym based on the French. I am sure the authors (both distinguished physicists, the first author received the Nobel for physics in 1992) had good intentions. They seem to believe there is a risk from low doses. I don't see any great advantage of the DARI. The public won't understand it any better than mSv. BERT is not a radiation unit or quantity. It is way of explaining radiation to the public. The public should never hear "BERT". They should hear statements, such as; "Your mammogram gave you an amount of radiation about equal to what you get from nature in a couple months". I hope this helps a few list readers.--
John R. Cameron (jrcamero@facstaff.wisc.edu)
2678 SW 14th Dr. Gainesville, FL 32608
(352) 371-9865 Fax (352) 371-9866
(winters until about May 15)PO Box 405, Lone Rock,WI 53556
(608) 583-2160; Fax (608) 583-2269
(summers: May 2002- September 2002)