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

Re: Radioisotope Efficiencies



I read your disclaimers with some amusement.  The fact that you feel

they're necessary illustrates two fundamental problems with RADSAFE:

(1) It is sometimes considered a lazy person's research tool.  (2) It's

sometimes used by the clueless to do things that are way outside their

qualifications.  (I remember one posting which went something like:

"I've never shipped radioactive material before.  What label should I

put on the package?")



While RADSAFE is good for discussions and is good for leads to reference

materials, it should NEVER be used in place of legitimate research, and

should NEVER substitute for needed qualifications.  Any references

received on RADSAFE should be independently confirmed through a

legitimate source.  If someone's too dumb or too lazy to do this, the

person who supplies the information should not be held accountable, even

if its wrong.  To cite an analogy, it's often a great idea to visit "Web

MD" or a similar site if you have questions about a medical condition.

However, it should not take the place of seeing a physician if you have

reason to believe you have something that may need treatment.  (Except,

perhaps, for those RADSAFER's who are physicians.  Even then, it may be

a good idea to see someone else.)



The opinions expressed are strictly mine.

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

Curies forever.



Bill Lipton

liptonw@dteenergy.com



Joel Baumbaugh wrote:



> Jim is correct in his question.

>

> As I thought I briefly mentioned in my original email/post, these were

> MY efficiencies under somewhat ideal conditions.

>

> The type (size and composition) of vial, the manufacture/type and

> amount of scintillation fluid (in the vial(s)), counting times,

> color/chemical quenching, background and how you deal with background

> (refrigeration/background subtract), how long its been since your PM

> service (you don't want any dust on the PMT tube faces), what your

> counting windows are set at/for, what formula you use for MDA/LLD,

> etc., etc., etc. ALL these parameters (and some I haven't thought of

> while writing this) make a difference on what efficiency YOU and

> YOU're machine will get/arrive at with the various/sundry

> radioisotopes I listed.

>

> Just like they say in the advertisements... "your results may

> vary"....  I was just giving you an example of what YOU should expect

> on YOUR machine if everything (your prep and the machine) are in top

> working order.

>

> Please don't nail me to a cross here - I was just trying to be

> helpful.  There are people on RADSAFE who are MUCH more knowledgeable

> about LSC's than I am.

>

> I don't think that you'll be able to find this information in the

> literature (either in a library or on-line) anywhere else..  Take it

> (and use it as a benchmark/reference) or leave it...

>

>

> ...Joel Baumbaugh (baumbaug@nosc.mil)

>     SSC-SD...

>

>

> At 09:53 AM 2/18/2004 -0500, JDNUKE52@aol.com wrote:

>

>> I have one question what was the LCS window settings and what liquid

>> scint cocktail use this is very important when establishing LCS

>> efficiencies.

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> Thankyou

>>

>>

>>                                                                Jim

>> Dykes  COH

>>

>