RE: NY Times Editorial on Marie Curie

["Lavera, Ron" <Ron.Lavera@nypa.gov>]

Radiation killed Mme Curie.  She discovered Radium.  She had much less
Radium than expected.  She must have received less radiation than
previously believed, therefore, this is another example of how the
regulations don't protect us.  They should believe us when we say that
radiation is BAD !

I believe that this is the mind set of the writer of the article.  The
writer is probably not aware that, assuming that she died of a radiation
related illness, Mme. Curie worked with poorly shielded diagnostic x-ray
machines in research and WW-I medical support etc.

I'm not sure if there was a breakdown in the communications loop, i.e.
was the writer informed of these other relevant facts, or should the
writer have attempted to check into these type of issues before
submitting the article.  Maybe the editor wanted it this way ?

If any of the press types out there have any comments, I would be very
interested in hearing them.

... mine and mine alone ...

Ron LaVera
lavera.r@nypa.gov

-----Original Message-----
From: RADPROJECT@aol.com [mailto:RADPROJECT@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 1998 12:12 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: Re: NY Times Editorial on Marie Curie


In a message dated 11/25/98 1:42:46 AM !!!First Boot!!!, AIto@jfcr.or.jp
writes:

<< Mme Curie's internal dose due to radium has recently found to be much
 less than the maximum accepted concentration to the public. In 1995,
Mme
 Curie's coffin was moved to Pantheon to be given France's highest
honour.
 At that time, French Office of Ionization Radiation Control (ORPI) had
 measured radon concentration in her coffin. It was 360 Bq/m3 while the
 maximum accepted public concentration is 7000 Bq/m3. See further
details
 in the article entitled "X-rays, not radium, may have killed Curie", 
 Nature, Vol. 377, 14 September 1995 >>

I don't understand the logic of  the above comparison. What does the
concentration of radon in the air of Mme. Curie's coffin derived in part
from
her Ra-226 body burden have to do with the  "maximum accepted public
concentration" [of Rn-222 in air] being stated as 7000 Bq/m3?  Research
going
back many decades has documented that radon is exhaled in the breath of
a
living being [or released from a body after death] in some relationship
to
internal deposition, which could be used to back calculate the Ra-226
body
burden. I haven't seen the the reference cited above, but will do so
shortly,
and the article may address the point I raise.

However, it seems that the comment above related to the narrow point  of
body
burden vs. public ambient airborne radon exposure standards from overall
environmental sources of radon is mixing apples with oranges in regard
to the
issue of what was the level of Mme. Curie's radium body burden and dose,
and
if her radium body burden contributed in any way to her death.

Stewart Farber
Director - Radium Experiment Assessment Project
19 Stuart St.
Pawtucket, RI 02860

Phone/FAX: (401) 727-4947  E-mail: radproject@usa.net

            Web address: http://www.delphi.com/carsreap

The Radium Experiment Assessment Project is a project of the Center for
Atomic
Radiation Studies, Inc., a not-for-profit 501(c)(3) organization


************************************************************************
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