On Sat, Jul 5, 2014 at 9:23 PM, Russell Standish <li...@hpcoders.com.au> wrote:
> IIUC, the occupational acceptable limits are based on studies of > survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (who actually received a range of > different exposures, depending on how screened they were at the time of > the blast) The survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were unique in that they received their radiation virtually instantaneously, it is probably far more dangerous to receive radiation in that way because the cells have no time to make repairs; even so the survivors didn't develop more solid cancers than the average Japanese unless they received more than 100 millisieverts, and they didn't have a larger chance of getting leukemia unless they got more than 200 millisieverts. By comparison the average resident of this planet receives 2.4 millisieverts from background radiation, but they received that radiation over the course of a full year not in a fraction of a second as the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki did. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
