man exposes Scientist lying in the text books and gets run off the radio.

[LnGrrrR]

Good thing science didn't produce the computer that Mouse types on.

[Blake]

I waited 4 hours hours not one of you called in...

I imagine that there are many nights like that in the whoring business if the is not attractive.

[mouse]

As promised.

11:18 / 43:24 Mark


http://www.wabcradio.com/FlashPlayer...817&ID=2350693

[JoeChalupa]

Thanks for the link

[Heat Miser]

Is this real?

[mouse]

As promised.

11:18 / 43:24 Mark


http://www.wabcradio.com/FlashPlayer...817&ID=2350693

[Heat Miser]

Just finished ready all pages my vote for Topic of the year!

[Hermey]

My vote top 5 topics of 2011

[redzero]

I agree, mouse. This thread great because everybody in it clowned you.

[mouse]

My vote top 5 topics of 2011

Maybe at the MIT forums where people have the mental capacity to adsorb my wisdom.

[Blake]

I almost think you misspelled absorb on purpose

[redzero]

The guy dropped out of middle school. Give him a break.

[Heat Miser]

Red Zero Rocks!

[mouse]

I almost think you misspelled absorb on purpose

blame Firefox spell check

[mouse]

Can't be worse than walking through a backscatter scanner tbh.

could you elaborate?

[Agloco]

could you elaborate?

Sure,

What is the dose that someone receives from walking through such a device? How does one go about calculating it? What is the dose ratio and what are the long term biologic effects from being scanned as opposed to, say, sitting on the subsequent flight from New York to LA?

Thanks in advance for your lucid answer.

[JoeChalupa]

Huh?

[Heat Miser]

Sure,

What is the dose that someone receives from walking through such a device? How does one go about calculating it? What is the dose ratio and what are the long term biologic effects from being scanned as opposed to, say, sitting on the subsequent flight from New York to LA?

Thanks in advance for your lucid answer.

You need to back away a bit from your radiation support you sound like a vacuum cleaner salesman you know radiation is bad admit it form time to time so we can take you seriously.

[mouse]

Sure,

What is the dose that someone receives from walking through such a device? How does one go about calculating it? What is the dose ratio and what are the long term biologic effects from being scanned as opposed to, say, sitting on the subsequent flight from New York to LA?

Thanks in advance for your lucid answer.

I have a question for professor Googleitall

How many Bananas does one have to eat in order to duplicate that same radiation exposure?

[Agloco]

Huh?

Let's have another beer Joe. We can discuss it.

You need to back away a bit from your radiation support you sound like a vacuum cleaner salesman you know radiation is bad admit it form time to time so we can take you seriously.

Newsflash: Radiation is bad.

Now I ask you: What levels are bad for you? This is the crux of the discussion.

Read a few studies:

http://www.probeinternational.org/Ramsar.pdf

http://journals.lww.com/health-physi...ence_in.8.aspx

http://www.barc.ernet.in/publication...2010030405.pdf

I have a question for professor Googleitall

How many Bananas does one have to eat in order to duplicate that same radiation exposure?

Well let's see what "Professor Google-it-all" came up with..............

Dose from a banana: Approximately .078 uSv

Dose on a one-way trip from JFK to LAX: Approximately 20 uSv

Dose from a single backscatter scan: Approximately .09 uSv

So according to sources that anyone can access if they bothered, you might want to fear bananas almost as much as those scanners. One might also think twice before cavorting about the country on jetliners.

.......yet we don't see banana stock crashing or people taking to the nearest Greyhound terminals. We do, however, see a mild hysteria regarding those scanners. Interesting logic, wouldn't you agree?

Just for giggles, you are irradiating yourself right now mouse.......yeap that's right. Your body contains radioactive potassium which is in homeostasis (means the dose rate is more or less constant). You get roughly 149 uSv per year just from that. For those wondering, that's about 1900 bananas.

lol stoned to death with bananas

[Borat Sagyidev]

Let's have another beer Joe. We can discuss it.



Newsflash: Radiation is bad.

Now I ask you: What levels are bad for you? This is the crux of the discussion.

Read a few studies:

http://www.probeinternational.org/Ramsar.pdf

http://journals.lww.com/health-physi...ence_in.8.aspx

http://www.barc.ernet.in/publication...2010030405.pdf



Well let's see what "Professor Google-it-all" came up with..............

Dose from a banana: Approximately .078 uSv

Dose on a one-way trip from JFK to LAX: Approximately 20 uSv

Dose from a single backscatter scan: Approximately .09 uSv

So according to sources that anyone can access if they bothered, you might want to fear bananas almost as much as those scanners. One might also think twice before cavorting about the country on jetliners.

.......yet we don't see banana stock crashing or people taking to the nearest Greyhound terminals. We do, however, see a mild hysteria regarding those scanners. Interesting logic, wouldn't you agree?

Just for giggles, you are irradiating yourself right now mouse.......yeap that's right. Your body contains radioactive potassium which is in homeostasis (means the dose rate is more or less constant). You get roughly 149 uSv per year just from that. For those wondering, that's about 1900 bananas.

lol stoned to death with bananas

You lost me at the backscatter x-ray part. All of those exposures are very low but they are all different.

You really shouldn't compare those subjective values. But for these geniuses, I guess you can.

Backscatter x-ray scanners have a very soft spectrum that has very localized dose to the skin. Whereas all of those other background levels sans air travelers are largely whole body doses.

That .09 uSv body dose is more like 9 uSv to the skin and higher when you consider localization. Over the course of 20 years and getting scanned every 4-5 out of 7 days that 9uSv can add up to 50 mSv or 5 Rem, still pretty low, but not as much. Not surprising, pilots protested having to be scanned...and they won.

The elite rad physicists at DHS apply the .01 / 1% skin weighting factor and call it a day and promote it as safe. That factor was established largely due to the uncertainty of skin exposures especially with attribution of skin cancer from sun exposure.

A lot of studies now are showing correlation of skin cancer to ionizing radiation, including with airline professionals and pilots.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16238450

Personally, I don't think we should subject the air travel public to that. Let alone the privacy concerns.

The millimeter wave scanners do a better job anyway, and the only negative effects people can show are in unused terahertz range.

.

In regards to the bananas and background levels. We've been around for millions (thousands for some people) and have dealt with it pretty well, as those studies show. You might as well build a underground bunker, mass spec the radioactive potassium out of your diet intake and filter radon from the air to live radiation exposure free.

There is a place to be concerned and a place to make fun of crazy people calling into radio shows.

[Agloco]

You lost me at the backscatter x-ray part. All of those exposures are very low but they are all different.

You really shouldn't compare those subjective values. But for these geniuses, I guess you can.

Backscatter x-ray scanners have a very soft spectrum that has very localized dose to the skin. Whereas all of those other background levels sans air travelers are largely whole body doses.

That .09 uSv body dose is more like 9 uSv to the skin and higher when you consider localization. Over the course of 20 years and getting scanned every 4-5 out of 7 days that 9uSv can add up to 50 mSv or 5 Rem, still pretty low, but not as much. Not surprising, pilots protested having to be scanned...and they won.

The elite rad physicists at DHS apply the .01 / 1% skin weighting factor and call it a day and promote it as safe. That factor was established largely due to the uncertainty of skin exposures especially with attribution of skin cancer from sun exposure.

A lot of studies now are showing correlation of skin cancer to ionizing radiation, including with airline professionals and pilots.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16238450

Personally, I don't think we should subject the air travel public to that. Let alone the privacy concerns.

The millimeter wave scanners do a better job anyway, and the only negative effects people can show are in unused terahertz range.

Yes my explanation purposefully assumed risk to whole body for all of those metrics to avoid further confusion (I figured you and a handful of others would understand why I did this). I'd estimate that the skin does get about 9 uGy from these scanners. Still much lower than the annual limits, even for many scans. I'd also hasten to say that while dmax is at the skin surface for a backscatter scanner, the depth dose profile still shows 60% at a depth of 2cm (this for a 50kvp beam, closed field). In fact, a significant proportion of dose is still present (10%) at 4cm. Dose is not as highly localized as some advertise (but also not whole body as you aptly point out). The truth is somewhere in the middle. Here is a good article for folks to read:

http://www.telmarc.com/White%20Paper...ackscatter.pdf

This explains the physics, radio-biology and molecular bio behind the scanner concerns. Not exactly impartial, but the science is valid.

The real unfortunate thing about these scanners is that the FDA will not release their test results. If they did this, it would go a long way to assuaging fears over the technology (or confirming them......). I'd really like to see some numbers from them.

As for millimetere wave tech, if shown to be as effective in detecting foreign substances, then by all means that should be the first line scan. I believe I've state this in some prior threads.

[mouse]

Well let's see what "Professor Google-it-all" came up with..............

Dose from a banana: Approximately .078 uSv

Dose on a one-way trip from JFK to LAX: Approximately 20 uSv

Dose from a single backscatter scan: Approximately .09 uSv

So according to sources that anyone can access if they bothered, you might want to fear bananas almost as much as those scanners. One might also think twice before cavorting about the country on jetliners.

.......yet we don't see banana stock crashing or people taking to the nearest Greyhound terminals. We do, however, see a mild hysteria regarding those scanners. Interesting logic, wouldn't you agree?

Just for giggles, you are irradiating yourself right now mouse.......yeap that's right. Your body contains radioactive potassium which is in homeostasis (means the dose rate is more or less constant). You get roughly 149 uSv per year just from that. For those wondering, that's about 1900 bananas.

lol stoned to death with bananas

Solid take my man!

[mouse]

Still can't believe how re ed that was.

BTW mouse they do know how Stone Henge was built.

Who is they?

[mouse]

Snails mouse? Got into a dime bag full of hocus pocus again?

Prove me wrong.