RE: Abbreviations

[rkathren@tricity.wsu.edu (Ron L. Kathren)]

To all Radsafers interested in the topic:

Since Paul Frame hasn't jumped in yet, I'll get my 2 cents worth in first.
In the beginning, there was the roentgen, and only the roentgen, which was
originally adopted in 1928.  The roentgen was a unit that in its early years
described a number of quantities:  exposure, dose, and even something called
exposure dose.  In the 1940's it was realized that the roentgen was
inadequate to characterize dose quantities and hence the rep (roentgen
equivalent physical) and reb (roentgen equivalent biological) were proposed
by the late Herb Parker.  These were the forunner of the rad (which is,
incorrectly according to Laurie Taylor, usually thought of as a acronym for
radiation absorbed dose -- according to Laurie this was simply a made up
unit -- others have referred to it a roentgen absorbed dose in earlier days)
and rem (which was characterized variously over the years as roentgen
equivalent man [or mammal].  Parker wrote a great article on these radiation
quantities and units that was published in Radiology in 1950 and reprinted
in the book of his collected papers.  In the fullness of time, usage has
changed for many the derivation of the rem as an acronym to 'radiation
equivalent man'.  This and 'radiation absorbed dose' are certainly useful
mneumonics, and I hope the above clarifies their origins.

Ron Kathren

 
At 02:31 PM 8/5/98 -0500, Fulmer, Philip wrote:
>Lorna,
>
>I'm not sure who's got the final answer on this one.  I've always
>understood that rem stood for  "roentgen equivalent man" (and I have
>several textbooks that make that assertion).  The choice of  "roentgen"
>didn't bother me because dose equivalent includes the quality factor,
>which used to be based on RBE, which used x-rays as the reference
>radiation (how's that for contorted?).  But, lo and behold, FGR-11
>includes in its definition section a statement that rem stands for
>"radiation equivalent man," and your understanding is that rem stands
>for "rad equivalent man."   Where's our historian?
>
>Philip
>
>__________________________
>Philip C. Fulmer, PhD, CHP 
>Carolina Power & Light Company
>Harris Energy and Environmental Center
>3932 New Hill-Holleman Road
>P. O. Box 327
>New Hill, NC 27562-0327
>philip.fulmer@cplc.com
>(919) 362-3363      
>
>----------
>From: 	Lorna Bullerwell[SMTP:ljb1@cornell.edu]
>Sent: 	Wednesday, August 05, 1998 3:12 PM
>To: 	Multiple recipients of list
>Subject: 	Re: Abbreviations
>
>I've seen a couple of posts saying that rem stands for Roentgen equivalent
>man.  I thought rem stood for rad equivalent man, thus not named after a
>person.  If it is Roentgen eqivalent man, wouldn't it only be valid for for
>x and gammas effects and for air-equivalent people?
>
>
>
>************************************************************************
>The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
>information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
>
>

************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html