[ RadSafe ] Sickening Solar Flare

John Jacobus crispy_bird at yahoo.com
Thu Feb 10 22:51:51 CET 2005


As we all know, dose rate is a significant factor. 
That is why in teletherapy, the total dose is
fractionated.  Otherwise, patients would suffer
significant radiation burns.  Of course, treating
patients is not the same as large, asymptomatic
populations.  Low dose irradiation may work on some
cancers, but not on many.



--- Ted Rockwell <tedrock at starpower.net> wrote:

> In this regard, note that the "standard" Sakamoto
> treatment that he, Bauser
> and a few others have been given is 15 rad/treatment
> (delivered in about 1
> minute) twice a week, for five weeks, for 150 rad. 
> Bauser had this
> treatment three times, 450 rad total, over 2-3 years
> (figures all from
> memory).  He had no physically apparent symptoms
> (except he never caught any
> of the colds or other minor ailments usually
> encountered).  He felt fine,
> but his white cell count dropped considerably and
> then returned.
> 
> Stafford Warren reported a 300 rad single jolt from
> an x-ray malfunction--no
> symptoms.  Laurie Taylor wrote that he got 1000 rad
> or more over many years,
> with no symptoms, and died at 102.
> 
> The evidence for concern at levels below 100 rad
> seems slight.
> 
> Ted Rockwell
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl]On
> Behalf Of jjcohen
> Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 1:46 PM
> To: radsafe; Bernard Cohen
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Sickening Solar Flare
> 
> 
> I doubt that the LD-50 for human radiation exposure
> has ever been determined
> with scientific accuracy. It has been inferred from
> atom bomb casualty data
> and similar imprecise sources. So----, from a
> practical basis, LD-50
> estimates of 300, 450,& 500 rem are essentially the
> same number. Take your
> pick. In all likelihood, the actual value (known
> only to God) is somewhere
> between 100 & 1000 rem.
> Interesting to compare this range to what some of us
> hormesis fans believe
> to be the "optimal" dose range for human exposure 
> of somewhere between
> 1.0 and 10.0 rem/a.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Bernard Cohen <blc+ at pitt.edu>
> To: Maury Siskel <maurysis at ev1.net>
> Cc: RadiatSafety <
> Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 8:26 AM
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Sickening Solar Flare
> 
> 
> > Is this piece correct in saying that LD-50 is 300
> rem? It used to be 450
> > rem.
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the radsafe mailing
> list
> radsafe at radlab.nl
> 
> For information on how to subscribe/unsubscribe and
> other settings visit:
> http://radlab.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/radsafe
> 
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the radsafe mailing
> list
> radsafe at radlab.nl
> 
> For information on how to subscribe/unsubscribe and
> other settings visit: 
> http://radlab.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/radsafe
> 


=====
+++++++++++++++++++
"Baltimore is actually a very safe city if you are not involved in the drug trade."
DR. PETER BEILENSON, the city's health commissioner.

-- John
John Jacobus, MS
Certified Health Physicist
e-mail:  crispy_bird at yahoo.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


More information about the radsafe mailing list