What was interesting about the Taiwan case is that the problem was discovered by a tenant who brought a Geiger counter home for study purposes...or something to that effect.
Today's radiation use licenses emphasis disposal as much as acquisition of radiation sources. Stochastic risk depends is a "linear no threshold" relationship, and yes this method is chosen as the more conservative measure over the deterministic risk which has a threshold, ie skin burns, cataract formation etc., hence why using the Sievert as a dose measurement unit of deterministic risk is not entirely correct. My understanding is that higher dose rates are more problematic as, with a low dose rate cell/DNA repair can take place between radiation interactions. With higher dose rates , this is not so. Therefore, the concept of DDRF Dose, dose reduction factor for low dose rates. Except possibly the dials, any other sources of radiation in a Blanik cockpit? During the WW2 there were ladies that painted radium dials, and licked the tip of the brush to get the fine tip for detailed work... cheers AJ On 30/07/2008, Mike Borgelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > At 01:40 AM 30/07/2008, you wrote: > >> HA, >> >> I was trawling through some aviation museums in Europe and noticed that >> there is a health warning on some cockpits. For example, I think the >> aircraft preservation people in the UK are only allowed 10 minutes exposure >> in some cockpits like Blaniks due to the radiation from the primitive >> instruments. Same story in Lancaster bombers. >> >> I guess that is probably as long as you would want to spend in a Blanik >> cockpit, but it does question the sense in "restoring" them. >> >> D McD >> > > Anyone got access to a radiation counter and a Blanik? > > Might be interesting. > > Also interesting is a scientific paper I have about a study on radiation > exposure in Taiwan. Seems someone mixed an old industrial cobalt radiation > source into a bunch of scrap steel which ended up as reinforcing rods in > concrete which went into an apartment building. After some years this was > found out and a study done on the people who lived there. This was a good > study as there were lots of other people in the same situations in other > apartment buildings so there was a good control group. They looked for > cancer rates amongst the exposed - and found that they were 3% of what they > expected. > Journal of Amercian Physicians and Surgeons Volume 9 Number 1 Spring 2004 > > Radiation exposure allowances are based on the "Linear No Threshold" theory > on the grounds that this is conservative and safe. There is evidence that it > doesn't work like that for low doses. > > Mike > Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments > phone Int'l + 61 746 355784 > fax Int'l + 61 746 358796 > cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784 > Int'l + 61 429 355784 > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > website: www.borgeltinstruments.com > > _______________________________________________ > Aus-soaring mailing list > [email protected] > To check or change subscription details, visit: > http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring >
_______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list [email protected] To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
