[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

"Becquerels NEVER!", formerly Re: medical misadministration to child



There are three reasons we should stay with the traditional units:



1.  They're better:  The traditional units are based on real quantities, e.g., a

Ci is a gram of radium.  They thus tend to be more intuitive:  a uCi is a small

quantity of radioactive material, a mCi is a medium quantity, and a Ci is a

lot.  A mrad is a small dose, a rad is a significant dose, and multiple rads are

serious.  You tend not to need as many prefixes.  It's much harder to relate to

a MBq.



2.  It would be time consuming and expensive to convert.  I hate to think of the

thousands of meter dials that would have to be changed, the thousands of

procedures that would have to be rewritten, and the thousands of hours of

training required to implement SI at our nuclear power plants.  Any reasonable

cost versus benefit analysis would tell you, "no way."



3.  It would create a human factors disaster.  If professional hp's make

mistakes in conversion, how can we expect our employees to suddenly switch to a

new system.  It's the equivalent of saying that, starting tomorrow, everyone

should drive on the left side of the road.  Any reasonable risk versus benefit

analysis would tell you, "no way."



If America always went along with "the rest of the world," Sadam Hussein would

still be making WMD's and gassing his own people.



The opinions expressed are strictly mine.

It's not about dose, it's about trust.

Curies forever.



Bill Lipton

liptonw@dteenergy.com



"Michael G. Stabin" wrote:



> From: "William V Lipton"

> > This very common error is why I am so much against forcing SI units onto

> operational hp's.

> > Curies forever, Becquerels NEVER.

>

> It's the conversions *between* unit systems that cause problems, and will

> cause more and more problems as the US refuses to join the rest of the world

> and use SI. And then *within* a unit system, what is easier to remember, 1

> dis/s or 3.7x10^10 dis/s? What is easier to convert, 1 liter = 1000 ml or 1

> qt = 32 oz, 1 km = 1000 m or 1 mi = 5280 ft, etc.? Switching to SI and

> allowing these clumsy units to disappear in the rear view mirror is clearly

> in the best interests of the workers and patients we are trying to protect.

> Continuing to resist joining the world scientific community and doing these

> conversions between unit systems will certainly result in more

> miscalculations, on that we can agree.

>

> Mike

>

> Michael G. Stabin, PhD, CHP

> Assistant Professor of Radiology and Radiological Sciences

> Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences

> Vanderbilt University

> 1161 21st Avenue South

> Nashville, TN 37232-2675

> Phone (615) 343-0068

> Fax   (615) 322-3764

> Pager (615) 835-5153

> e-mail     michael.g.stabin@vanderbilt.edu

> internet   www.doseinfo-radar.com

>

> ************************************************************************

> 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/