Re: Interesting News Release

[Charles Thomas <u088558@pobox1663.Lanl.GOV>]

I would tend to agree with Jim Muckerheide even though I would not put
something like Scott's though past our wonderful media.




At 09:21 AM 2/1/96 -0600, you wrote:
>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
>
>
Charles (Tommy) C. Thomas
Los Alamos National Laboratory
The above are mine alone and probably 
are not those of LANL