Re: give me your opinion

[Hulltmsr@aol.com]

In a message dated 99-01-27 11:53:20 EST, you write:

<< 1) Once again, is you became sick from inhaling Pu, it would be 10-30 YEARS
 later. If you needed chelation or lung lavage it could be arranged (Very
 unlikely).
 
 2) We are not talking IDLH atmosphere here, we are talking airborne Pu.
 
 3) When you say toxicity, do you mean from heavy metal?  Or radioactivity?
 So a battery bursts open and knocks your partner out in the same room as
 you.  Do you need a APR to respond? From the acid fumes or lead?  Neither.
 
 4) I am appalled how you tied a non-nuclear event (IDLH atmosphere in a
 manhole)  to this and any nuclear plant.  Why didn't you bring up a IDLH
 manhole at a pet food factory instead?
 
 5) This has strayed from the subject.
 
 My own opinion.
 
 Mike Dempsey
  >>
My response to your response to my response to the original scenario....

1) I've never directly handled Pu, though I've studied some about it and
generated power from its fission.  I have however been told, and read, that Pu
was a very dangerous toxin (poison) and that a very small amount put into a
cities water supply could quickly kill thousands of people (not radiologically
nor as a heavy metal uptake nor as a carcinogen causing cancer some 20-30
years later).  Everyone seemed to be addressing this from a radiological
standpoint and I was simply asking if the real problem might be the toxicity
to the human organism.

If I have been misinformed, please correct me 

2) Whether we are talking Pu or IDLH or fire or explosive materials or any
other hazard, my point was simply:  Only fools rush in without at least some
sort of cursory evaluation of the conditions they are about to enter.

3)  Toxicity, in every dictionary I've ever used, referred to a poisonous
substance, such as arsenic, hemlock, i.e., if consumed/injected/caused to
enter the body in any manner and in sufficient quantities, the person dies
within a short time.  I am not referring to heavy metal uptake.

4)  Don't be so appalled.  My example was at a nuclear station because that is
where it happened.  The occurence of which I have direct knowledge, did not
happen at a pet food factory.  I don't do pet food.  Also, most of us on
radsafe are, or have been, involved with radiation/radioactive materials at
some nuclear facility.  That 's what we know.  That is where our experience
comes from.

5)  Then don't stray.  I've worked in nuclear since 1962, operated reactors,
trained reactor operations, maintenance, health physics, and other personnel,
however, though I've assimilated quite a bit of useful information over the
years in this industry, I hoped from the expertise of those involved with this
online, I would get this one point made clear to me. 

 >>>Is Pu more hazardous toxically or radiologically?<<<

Which is it?? 

 Thank you for responding to my contribution to this thread.  It is
unfortunate that you were so appalled at my mentioning a nuclear station that
you failed to understand anything else I wrote.

It is , after all, just my opinion (and that's what this thread asked for),
with an honest question thrown in, hoping for clarification.

Thomas M. Hull RO/SRO/NSS/OS/SOE/IT/TW/HP/Rev/SBD/ASTE 

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