Interesting News Release

[JMUCKERHEIDE@delphi.com]

Scott,

In the context of the article, it is a good use of the term, although
confusing because it was stated in reverse from the intended perspective being 
communicated. 

The artcle reports the lab saying in effect:  "We are measuring 1 to 10 uBq,
compared to 200-300 million uBq during Chernobyl." 

Does this make more sense (giving the author and the lab the 'benefit of the
doubt' on intent for this term. 

Regards, Jim Muckerheide
jmuckerheide@delphi.com
==========================
> IMHO, the "200-300 million micro-becquerels" is yet another way that the
> media (apparently from other countries, as well as the U.S.) tries to
> sensationalize matters of radiation.  Imagine readers' lack of interest if
> the article said "200-300 becquerels."
> 
> My opinion only.
> 
> Scott O. Schwahn, CHP
> Operational Health Physicist
> Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility
> (804)249-7551 (w)
> (804)249-7363 (fax)
> schwahn@cebaf.gov