Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: DBrow

There are many forms of radiation, and many ways in which they damage cells. Moreover which cells get damaged is important, which cells, which organs. The concept and use of REMs is a dangerous oversimplification, imo. I never liked the concept.

In instant case: we have NO experience with the long term biological effect of back-scatter x-rays and also none with devices that use the terahertz radiation. What has been done to calibrate the REM so far is modeling or various sorts.

The REM dosages you read of during an airline flight are not x-rays, they are cosmic rays. The two things do different kinds of damage. In fact the body may be more able to repair the damage from cosmic rays than a REM equivalent of x-rays, or terahertz radiation.


221 posted on 11/14/2010 7:56:27 PM PST by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies ]


To: bvw

“In fact the body may be more able to repair the damage from cosmic rays than a REM equivalent of x-rays, or terahertz radiation.”

Or both or all may cause hormesis.

For now I’ll go with what the health physics guys say about dose and its measurement, when comparing 15 KeV photons to the flight environment.

I’ve seen some flight spectra, there are loads of photons, from air interaction and also from the mass of the plane. I’m more concerned with the neutron flux (for NSEU, not human effects), though at a bit higher altitude.


231 posted on 11/14/2010 8:04:00 PM PST by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson