Re: rem vs. rad

[Tony Hedges <loui19@mail.dreamscape.com>]

RADSAFERs,
  I found the following on page 5 of ICRP 26:

 "(21) The recommended values of Q and Q are intended for use only in
radiation protection, and then for comparing actual levels of exposure with
the limits of dose equivalent, or for assessing those components of
detriment that are taken into account in the setting of such limits.  The
values of Q and Q have been selected on the basis of revelant values of
relative biological effectiveness but they also take account of the fact
that the dose-equivalent limits (see paragraphs 103-104) are based on
extrapolations from higher absorbed doses at which deleterious effects in
man can be directly assessed.  These values of Q are therefore not
necessarily representative of values of relative biological effectiveness
for other observed effects, such as stochastic effects in animals at low
levels of absorbed dose or nonstochastic effects in man at high absorbed
doses.  It is particularly important that dose equivalent not be used to
assess the likely early consequences of severe accidental exposures to man."

Hope this helps the discussion along...


    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
   * Tony Hedges               *
  *  RPT Instructor           *
 *   loui19@dreamscape.com   *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *