Julia Thompson schreef:
> On Sun, 20 May 2001, John D. Giorgis wrote:
>
> > At 11:29 PM 5/19/01 -0500 Dan Minette wrote:
> > >I meant to include some stuff on radiation exposure and limits. BTW, I have
> > >a quote on acceptable limits for a fetus
> >
> > I could say something here to appropriately highlight the profound
> > irony of this discussion..... but I think that I've said enough
> > already.
>
> I don't understand something here.
>
> The way I read it was, they've set standards for what's an acceptable
> amount of radiation for a fetus to get, and if you're worried about your
> fetus getting too much radiation, look at all the various sources you're
> getting radiation from and see what you can minimize.
>
I was thinking of a ducumentary a few days back where they showed the results of
some 'very harmless' experiments using very low radiation material to see how iron
and iodine work during pregnancy. Also some experiments to follow development of
fetuses using X-rays. The experiments were conducted in the fifties and sixties in
the US and the UK. A large scale followup in the US showed that almost all the
children had cancers related to radiation exposure during pregnancy and most of
them died. In the UK the ones that could be traced had the same problems, most died
early. There hasn't been done any large scale follow up after the experiments in
the UK. After these the tolerance of radiation exposure for fetuses was set very
low indeed.
Source was the Discovery channel, so the documentary is to be taken with a bit of
scepsis. None the less it was rather disturbing.
Sonja.
