Re: AW: Prussian Blue as Tmt for Exposure to Radioactive Exposures

[LancerGT@AOL.COM]

Franz, 

       The Report was sponsored by the IAEA (through the  European commission (EC) the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, The World Health Organization (WHO), The World Meterological, the IAEA and UNSCEAR). 

       The International Chernobyl Project (ICP) Conclusions and Recommendations were approved by the ICP International Committe on 22 March 1991 and presented for scrutiny to an international conference in Vienna 21 24 May, 1991 (weren't you there?). You can try and purchase a copy from the IAEA website of the overview (STI/PUB/884  (1991)) or spring a few extra shekels for for the full report  (STI/PUB//894 (1991)) ISBN 92-0-12939. and READ it (it is out of print and mine is currently unavailable for refreshing). This was an exhaustive study and covered many aspects of the accident only one small thread was that of which I mentioned. I therefore do not consider it to be a faulty one

       Though I do not dispute my potential for a fallable memory on a decade old  plus study, I wish to state emphatically that no conclusions were drawn by myself now  - nor were any drawn from that data at that time - as no explanation for it was proffered. The differences may well have been due to unmeasured variations in the chemical composition of the compounds from the various nations used (I do not know what scrutiny was applied this). Additionally I consider the lead thread of your response unprofessional without having an understanding of the report nor its'  findings. You have a habit of being aggressive on this list. I do however, welcome the constructive commentary that would help clear up any misunderstandings I may have in the matter.


Best Regards,

David Lawrence

Brilliance is no excuse for arrogance



Original Message


> The  ICP report compiled by the United Nations and the IAEA for the Chernobyl Project contains information of interest regarding the effectiveness of Prussian Blue. Their data implied however, that the country of origin was a very significant factor in the effectiveness of the dye in on Cesium elimination. The three countries whose product was tested were Germany, the USA and Great Briain with the German make having the greateest apparent effectiveness and the British the least. No explanation was offered for this and I have heard little of this finding in the current discussions. Was it ever discounted?
>
>
> [----------------------------------------------------------



> I do not know the "ICP report", but reading your summary it must be a very faulty, incomplete and wrong report - or (what I would rather be inclined to believe) your interpretation is totally wrong. The country of origin cannot be decisive for effectiveness. Any differences must be due to the chemical composition and there it is really of no importance, where the chemical comes from!!!!



> Hexacyanoferrates have been known since decades to adsorb Caesium and they have been used for analytical purposes. Prof. Giese from Germany has long before the Chernobyl accident investigated the use of different hexacyanoferrates and he found one compound, which to my memory is an ammonium-hexacyanoferrat to be most effective and this compound has actually been "baptized" as "Giese-Salt", under which name it is well known in Europe. Hexacyanoferrates have been used extensively in Norway and in Cumbria (Great Britain) to reduce the Cs-137 concentration in sheep. I do not know, where in the USA hexacyanoferrates would have been used because of no contamionation from Chernobyl - or please enlighten me, where US made hexacyanoferrates have been tested. Hexacyanoferrates have been tested and actually used to decrease Cs-contamination of milk in Austria in order to be able to export dried milk and we even had a small research program on wild animals like roe deer. We decided that the decrease of Cs-137 in roe deer was not worth the effort, because the reduction in Cs-137 and especially the reduction of the dose when eating the Austrian average of about 200 g of roe deer meat per year was really negligible. 



> I have not followed this thread, but would now ask, where I can find that ICP report on the net, because I simply cannot believe that international organizations would distribute such nonsense, that the country of origin would be responsible of the effect of a chemical!



> [Christian Schönhofer] Franz