RE: Dental X-Rays Might Lead to Small Babies

[alstonchris@netscape.net]

Well, that's 3 mrem *where*?  Is that the mother's EDE?  I can't believe that it's a fetal dose, which anyway should be in rad/Gy. This isn't nuc med, so there's no reason, that I can see, for using a presumptively risk-based unit (Sv/rem), instead of absorbed dose.



Shoot me, Seymour

cja





"Franta, Jaroslav" <frantaj@AECL.CA> wrote:

>But that was for radiation doses about a hundred thousand times higher than the 3 mrem the article said was received in 21 dental radiographs.



__________________________________________________________________

Introducing the New Netscape Internet Service. 

Only $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register



Netscape. Just the Net You Need. 



New! Netscape Toolbar for Internet Explorer

Search from anywhere on the Web and block those annoying pop-ups.

Download now at http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/install.jsp

************************************************************************

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/