RE: Fwd: Radiation Exposures to Tokai Workers

["Potter, Charles" <capotte@sandia.gov>]

If I remember correctly, the original numbers were expressed in rem, i.e.
dose equivalent units.  My understanding of acute radiation sickness is that
it is defined in terms of absorbed dose units, being that the absorbed
energy is actually what causes the effects rather than radiation "quality".
The numbers below may just reflect the difference between the quality factor
being included or not.

Gus

Stay the patient course.
Of little worth is your ire.
The network is down.
-- A computer error message in Haiku form

C. A. Gus Potter
Sandia National Laboratories
Albuquerque, New Mexico
(505) 844-2750
capotte@sandia.gov 

-----Original Message-----
From: Heinmiller, Bruce [mailto:heinmillerb@aecl.ca]
Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 1999 10:21 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: RE: Fwd: Radiation Exposures to Tokai Workers


Specification of the quantity being reported would be useful.  This may also
shed some light on why photon and neutron absorbed doses are not specified
separately.  For example, is it an estimate of the sum of the photon
absorbed dose and the RBE-weighted neutron absorbed dose (which does not
result in any quantity having units of sieverts, Jim) to some specified
tissue?

Bruce Heinmiller CHP
heinmillerb@aecl.ca

> > > >A:  910 rad (not 1700)
> > > >B:  500 rad (not 900)
> > > >C:  120 rad (not 300)

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