Re: Beta burns

["Scott D. Kniffin" <Scott.D.Kniffin.1@gsfc.nasa.gov>]

Mike,

Most likely not true beta burns but burns from the light produced in the
initial flash during fireball formation with additional aggrivation by
xrays.  Also possible depending on location and size of blast are actual
radiated heat burns.  The problem here is that this tends to imply ignition
of the target and a 100% kill given energy/cm^2 in my book here.  (The
Effects of Radiation on Electronic Systems)  Yet a third possibility would
be beta burns from direct contamination via the dust cloud.  Any more info
available, anyone?

Scott Kniffin

mailto:Scott.D.Kniffin.1@gsfc.nasa.gov
RSO, Unisys Corp. @ Lanham, MD
CHO, Radiation Effects Facility, GSFC, NASA, Greenbelt, MD

The opinions expressed here are my own.  They do not necessarily represent
the views of Unisys Corporation or NASA.  This information has not been
reviewed by my employer or supervisor.   

At 16:14 07/14/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Dear RadSafers
>Reports of beta burns received by the Marshall Islanders and the crew of
>the Lucky Dragon say that beta burns were observed only on bare skin that
>was unprotected by clothing. How can this be? It seems to me that ordinary
>clothing does not provide much protection from betas from mixed fission
>products.
>thanks, mike
>"Shlala gashle" (Zulu greeting, meaning "Stay safe")
>mike (mcnaught@LANL.GOV)