[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: FW: Sickening Solar Flares
John:
Nonetheless, if NASA can "confuse" exposure to a small volume of tissue
from a dental x-ray and equate it erroneously to the potential effect of
whole body dose they have a problem-- both from a technical and
credibility/public communications perspective.
Stewart Farber
===============
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 06:56:53 -0800 (PST), John Jacobus
<crispy_bird@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Of course, NASA could have confused the entrance
> exposure rather than the dose equivalent.
>
> --- farbersa <farbersa@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 13:39:28 -0800, Careway, Harold
>> A. (GE Energy)
>> <Harold.Careway@gene.GE.com> wrote:
>>
>> > How different it is when you don't work in the
>> nuclear industry.
>> >
>> > hal
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: bounce-snglist-64594@lyris.msfc.nasa.gov
>> >
>> [mailto:bounce-snglist-64594@lyris.msfc.nasa.gov]On
>> Behalf Of NASA
>> > Science News
>> > Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 12:12 PM
>> > To: NASA Science News
>> > Subject: Sickening Solar Flares
>> >
>> >
>> > NASA Science News for January 27, 2005
>> >
>> > The biggest solar proton storm in 15 years erupted
>> last week. Here on
>> > Earth, we were safe, protected by our planet's
>> thick atmosphere and
>> > magnetic field. But what would have happened to
>> an astronaut in space?
>> > NASA researchers have the answer.
>> >
>> > FULL STORY at
>> >
>> >
>>
> http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/27jan_solarflares.htm?list64594
>> ...............
>> ========
>> Hello all:
>>
>> How very odd that NASA would compare 1 rem whole
>> body from solar flares
>> which they erroneously equate to 10 dental x-rays at
>> 0.1 Rem each!! One
>> would certainly hope NASA could do a better job of
>> explaining radiation
>> exposure accurately than this.
>>
>> According to the HPS Ask the Expert Question #1193
>> at:
>>
>> http://hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q1193.html
>>
>> the dose equivalent of even a panoramic x-ray
>> [highest dose dental x-ray]
>> is 26 micro-Sv [2.6 mR NOT 100 mR as NASA states].
>> So NASA overstates the
>> dose from even a dental panoramic x-ray by a factor
>> of about 40, and 1 Rem
>> whole body would be equal to about 400 panoramic
>> x-rays. A single
>> intra-oral x-ray is about 10 micro-Sv [1 mR] dose
>> equivalent. So compared
>> to the typical intraoral x-ray, NASA's estimate of
>> 100 mR from a typical
>> dental x-ray is 100 times too high and 1 Rem whole
>> body would be equal in
>> dose equivalent to 1000 intraoral x-rays.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Stewart Farber
>> [203] 367-0791 [home office]
--
Stewart Farber
Consulting Scientist
1285 Wood Ave.
Bridgeport, CT 06604
[203] 367-0791 [home office]
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.4 - Release Date: 1/25/2005
************************************************************************
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/