RE: Rads/rems (formerly radiographer "overexposure")

[John Jacobus <crispy_bird@YAHOO.COM>]

I think the stochastic risks are based on the

incidence rates from large doses and small populations

extrapolated to low doses and large populations.  



To me, the response at high doses in Gy (rad) are

non-stochastic, e.g., erythema, blood count

suppression, etc.  There is no stochastic inferance;

just some quasi-threshold.



--- "NIXON, Grant (Kanata)" <GNIXON@MDS.Nordion.com>

wrote:

> 

> Similarly, re. photographic emulsions (film),

> ICRU-47 (Sect 3.8.1, p. 13)

> states that "Absorbed doses as high as several Gy

> can be measured; however,

> the concept of dose equivalent is no longer

> applicable at such levels."

> 

> Is it not an acknowledged fact that the stochastic

> risk was de-facto

> determined from radiological accidents (i.e., doses

> in the 10's and 100's of

> rads from nuclear bomb survivor data)? If so, why

> does ICRU claim that the

> applicability of the concept to high doses is

> dubious? Is there not a

> contradiction here? 

> . . .



=====

-- John

John Jacobus, MS

Certified Health Physicist

e-mail:  crispy_bird@yahoo.com



__________________________________

Do you Yahoo!?

Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

http://sitebuilder.yahoo.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/