[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Fe-55



        William,

        You are absolutely correct in your concern about exposure rates!!!!!
However, looking at the other side of the coin (depending on the type(s) of
experiments you are conducting), you may find that you need to use
"substantially" less product when your efficiency for/probability of
detection increases so dramatically... I DO like the shorter half-life of
the Fe-59.

        Joel



At 08:53 AM 8/20/97 -0500, you wrote:
>I would not suggest having researchers switch from Fe-55 to Fe-59 just because 
>it is easy to detect.  Fe-59 can have some exposure concerns from all the high 
>energy beta and gamma radiation.
>
>Our researchers use and prefer Fe-55 over Fe-59 any day!!!
>
>Regards,
>Regards,
>
>William Lorenzen
>Children's Hospital
>Boston, MA
>
>lorenzen_w@a1.tch.harvard.edu
>
>
>
>
Joel T. Baumbaugh (baumbaug@nosc.mil)
Naval Research and Development (NRaD)
San Diego, CA., U.S.A.

The content of this message has not been reviewed or endorsed by my employer
(the U.S. Navy), the Federal government or my supervisors.