radiation

April 24, 2003

Even small amounts of radiation , including x-rays , are

dangerous as they are cumulative over a lifetime. They don't ''go

away'' and once you do reach a threshold, cellular mutation can be

accelerated, which leads to cancer. That's why they stand in a lead

shielded room while you are in the room with the machine. They know

that just being in the room with the radiation where it is not

necessarily being directly directed towards them that there is still

a risk.

If they acted in front of you as if they were frightened

themselves then it's unlikely you would expose yourself to such

radiation so they act calm and normal, but get behind a lead lined

wall just the same. Of course there are times in our lives when we

need x-rays but in the past 30 years there has been a great effort to

limit exposure to x-rays and to make x-ray machines themselves far

less powerful.

I will tell you this. When the day arrives when x-ray machines

and all forms of radiologic diagnostic testing and disease treatment

are deemed obsolete by whatever technology replaces it, you will hear

no end to the ''bad old days'' of raditation and the medical

establishment will then tell you in graphic detail just how dangerous

radiation ''was''. It's always this way with any medical treatment or

procedure. They never will tell you how dangerous it is until they

have something to replace it with.

BOB

>

> I would think that mamograms are included?

>

> I was not very much refering to x-rays though they are a form of

radiation, dangerous but manageable in very small doses.....I was

refering to nuclear radiation.

>

> Mark

>

August 25, 2004

Hi Ian,

I have a link to the HSE info site on radiation , it is

http://www.hse.gov.uk/radiation/index.htm

You might be able to find info there, another link for you to try is

http://www.srp-uk.org/servfaq.html

lots of other links on their link page, hope this helps

Jim storrar

========================================

Message date : Aug 25 2004, 07:41 PM

From : ian@...

To : " "

Copy to :

Subject : RADIATION

Hello All

I was wondering if any one could help me on this one does anyone now the limites

of exposure to radioactive materials some of the guys have been working with

some material that had a reading on 0.5 they where working with the material for

a few hours is there anybody hwho can help me need to give the guy's some feed

back before they start turning in to mutants

Cheers Ian

--

Whatever you Wanadoo:

http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/time/

This email has been checked for most known viruses - find out more at:

http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/help/id/7098.htm

August 25, 2004

Ian

What type of material, NORM, LSA, radioactive sources, nucleonic sources? How

long were they in contact with it and how close were they to it, did they have a

whole body dose or a dose to an individual limb? Are they classified or non

classified workers? Were they wearing any PPE do they have any predisposing

medical history that may make them an at risk person / group?

The annual dose limit (whole body) is 20mSv per year. I could be more accurate

if you know the activity level of the material and dose / dose rate.

If they have been exposed to NORM / LSA (the most common exposure in the older

offshore installations) then there is a risk of long term harm to health, this

goes for any exposure to radiation, however we need to put this in perspective.

It is known that if someone receives a radiation dose of 1Sv (1,000mSv) they

have a 1 in 25 chance of dying of cancer at some time in the future. This is a

very large dose and not realistic for someone working offshore with NORM.

Because of the safety culture offshore and the use of PPE it is estimated that

the maximum annual radiation dose received by someone working with NORM offshore

regularly will be less than 1mSv. The risk of these low doses causing premature

death at some time in the future is estimated to be less than 1 in 25,000.

To compare this to other more familiar risks:

Activity Risk of Death

Smoking 10 cigs per day 1 in 200

Natural causes for a 40 year old 1 in 700

Accidents on the road 1 in 10,000

Accidents in the home 1 in 10,000

Accidents at work 1in 50,000

I hope this will be of some use to you. Your company RPA would be able to help

you if you need more advice they are usually happy to be contacted at any time

but if I can be of any more help meantime drop me a note off line.

As a final thought, do you have an RPS (radaiation protection supervisor) on

your platform (assuming that you are on a platform) he/she should really be

dealing with this issue?

Regards

Arlene McDermott

---------------------------------

ALL-NEW Messenger - all new features - even more fun!

August 25, 2004

Hi Ian

I havnt done radiation stuff for a while but.......

What sort of instrument gave the reading? What is the unit of measurement

(Sv, Bq etc)? What was the source?

The limits for a classified worker are (copied from HSE Guidence) " employees

who are likely to receive an effective dose in excess of 6mSv per year or an

equivalent dose which exceeds three-tenths of any relevant dose limit and

shall forthwith inform those employees that they have been so designated. "

Hope this is good enough for a start

Regards

Rattigan

>From: ian@...

>Reply-

> < >

>Subject: RADIATION

>Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 19:00:08 +0200 (CEST)

>

>Hello All

>I was wondering if any one could help me on this one does anyone now the

>limites of exposure to radioactive materials some of the guys have been

>working with some material that had a reading on 0.5 they where working

>with the material for a few hours is there anybody hwho can help me need to

>give the guy's some feed back before they start turning in to mutants

>Cheers Ian

>

>--

>

>Whatever you Wanadoo:

>http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/time/

>

>This email has been checked for most known viruses - find out more at:

>http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/help/id/7098.htm

>

August 25, 2004

Anyone working with radioactive material should be doing so under the direct

supervision of a trained supervisor who has access to the correct monitoring

equipement, personal dosimetry and accurate record keeping to assess total

dose exposure.

I can't remember the limits per person but it all depends on whether they

are regularly exposed and are monitored more closely (classified radiation

workers) or just helping out in the short term and not expected to recieve a

substantial dose.

The limits also depend on if you are using the old system rem's and rads or

the new system of Sieverts.

At the end of the day this sort of thing should be a full time post for a

dedicated radiation worker.

Cheers

Stuart

>From: ian@...

>Reply-

> < >

>Subject: RADIATION

>Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 19:00:08 +0200 (CEST)

>

>Hello All

>I was wondering if any one could help me on this one does anyone now the

>limites of exposure to radioactive materials some of the guys have been

>working with some material that had a reading on 0.5 they where working

>with the material for a few hours is there anybody hwho can help me need to

>give the guy's some feed back before they start turning in to mutants

>Cheers Ian

>

>--

>

August 25, 2004

ionising radiations regulations 1999 are 20mSv for whole body 150 mSv for

lens of eye and 500mSv for any other organ or tissue, These are annual

cumulative doses

>From: ian@...

>Reply-

> < >

>Subject: RADIATION

>Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 19:00:08 +0200 (CEST)

>

>Hello All

>I was wondering if any one could help me on this one does anyone now the

>limites of exposure to radioactive materials some of the guys have been

>working with some material that had a reading on 0.5 they where working

>with the material for a few hours is there anybody hwho can help me need to

>give the guy's some feed back before they start turning in to mutants

>Cheers Ian

>

>--

>

>Whatever you Wanadoo:

>http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/time/

>

>This email has been checked for most known viruses - find out more at:

>http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/help/id/7098.htm

>

August 28, 2004

Hi,

On the face of it there's probably no need to panic. However based on what you

said it does sound as though the work control and hazard identification in your

area could be improved.

The meters people use either measure activity or dose rate. A radioactive

source may indicate a level of activity, but the dose rate received when

measured is negligible. If they were measuring dose rate, then '0.5' might be

0.5microsieverts per hour. As other people have mentioned the annual dose for

someone working with such substances is 20 millisieverts per year. The maths

mean that there is negligible risk; especially if it is a fixed source. Fixed

sources are often used as measuring devices in oil and gas installations, and

people sometimes have to work relatively close to these sources, but they are

designed to minimise exposure.

However if it was LSA or NORM, the terms are synonymous, then your concerns

should focus on how the job was conducted. The real risk from LSA comes from the

fact that it is loose, frequently found in the internals of machinery exposed to

well fluids. This means that the material can be absorbed through the eyes, cuts

in the skin, orally etc. Suitable PPE practically eliminates the chances of

anything being injested or absorbed. The LSA tends to offer much less in terms

of dose rate than a fixed source, but beacuse of the possibility of it entering

the body care has to be taken.

Ultimately any work where there is a radioactive aspect should be thoroughly

planned and co-ordinated. However I doubt there is any reason to be concerned.

Sorry if you know this already.

Yorston

> Message date : Aug 25 2004, 07:39 PM

> From : ian@...

> To : " "

> Copy to :

> Subject : RADIATION

> Hello All

> I was wondering if any one could help me on this one does anyone now the

limites of exposure to radioactive materials some of the guys have been working

with some material that had a reading on 0.5 they where working with the

material for a few hours is there anybody hwho can help me need to give the

guy's some feed back before they start turning in to mutants

> Cheers Ian

>

> --

>

> Whatever you Wanadoo:

> http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/time/

>

> This email has been checked for most known viruses - find out more at:

http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/help/id/7098.htm

>

January 27, 2006

Hi Sara,

Radiation was a walk in the park for me. I lost all the hair in the area

radiated, and still, 2 years later, it's smooth as can be. The area got very red

and ulcerated, like a really really bad sunburn and I needed to warn people so

the area didn't get touched with any heavy pressure by accident.

My radiation oncologist went over the long list of herbs, vitamins and

supplements I was taking and insisted I stop all live cultures, as this can

create a life threatening situation and has killed people. Collustrum was

especially impt to stop.

I had no problem with food and no problem with my appetite as a result of

radiation. Everyone's so different.

Wishes for few side-effects and all cancer cells destroyed!

Tom and Sara Moorman <tsmoorman@...> wrote:

HI all. I had my checkups Wednesday and am now in the process of getting

scheduled for Novalis Radiation treatments 5 days a week for 5 weeks.

Any information/suggestions about radiation would be wonderful. Novalis is a

type of fractionated radiation like IMRT but just a more precise machine.

Some of my questions are:

1) what side affects have any of you had

2) I am taking some natural supplements--is there anything that should be

avoided during radiation

3) How did you feel during your radiation

4) how was your appetite? Any certain foods that helped your or any that you

really hated--was it better to plan soft food or did you not have any problems

with foods

that is all I can think of right now--again any and all experiences would be

appreciated.

Thanks

Sara

January 27, 2006

Hi Sara,

I don't know if I can be of any help. While I was getting my high dose

radiation treatments (5 days a week for 6 weeks), I was also getting high

dosages of chemo drugs and morphine. All of it was making me incredibly sick and

I really couldn't eat anything at all for quite some time.

I did get severe radiation burns. Besides the blisters, I can't describe

the rest. It would be too...I don't know...I just can't! I'm sorry! Because of

the location of your tumor, I would really hope they do something very different

with you. I'm not familiar with Novalis radiation. But the one thing I did that

may help you is I used Calendula gel on the area of my burns. It is very

soothing and cooling. I also spent many hours with a fan blowing right on me in

the middle of winter!

The morphine was for the radiation burns too. It made me very cold all

the time! So if you get morphine, prepare to be cold for a couple months. The

radiation killed off my reproductive system instaneously. Fortunately I went

through all the menopausal symptoms while I was too stoned stupid on morphine to

notice them! Except for the hot flashes! They were the only time I was warm!

Radiation causes severe nausea, just like the chemo and morphine. I

took Zofran, the strongest anti-nausea medication made, but it didn't help. The

best thing I can recommend for nausea (and for any kind of appetite, to help

with sleep, and to make the pain more tolerable) I can't recommend! It is not

legal in my state or in many other states! There are a few states in which it is

legal and can be prescribed and monitored by a doctor. If you are in one of

those states you are very fortunate. I think you probably know what it is.

I don't know what else I can tell you Sara. It was not an easy

treatment and in all fairness to you, there is really no way I can sugar coat

the experience. There is one of the supplements I use that helps repair the skin

after the radiation. It is called Rejuvacel. It generates new healthy cell

growth. I used it during the entirety of my treatment to repair cellular damage

to my cancer site. The results were nothing short of miraculous. If you would

like more info on it, email me and I'll tell you all about it and how to get

it.

You can do this though, Sara. My docs told me I would be gone 4 years

ago. I survived. I don't know how I did. I know " what " I did! But I really don't

know " how " I survived being that sick. That is why it is so important to me to

share " what " I did with anyone and everyone who may benefit from it. I continue

to keep you in my prayers. All my very best to you as you continue to go through

your treatment.

Blessings,

Tom and Sara Moorman <tsmoorman@...> wrote:

Any information/suggestions about radiation would be wonderful.

---------------------------------

Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, & more on new and

used cars.

February 18, 2007

Dear Gidon,

Five minutes....

Best of Health!

Dr. Saul Pressman

radiation

> Does anybody have any idea how long I have to wait before someone goes

> into the sauna with ozone after radiation " therapy " ?

>

> Gidon

>

February 18, 2007

Dear Gidon,

Five minutes....

Best of Health!

Dr. Saul Pressman

radiation

> Does anybody have any idea how long I have to wait before someone goes

> into the sauna with ozone after radiation " therapy " ?

>

> Gidon

>

April 14, 2007

WOW . Sorry to hear about your son. What kind of cancer? I

don't know the answers to your question but I will keep you and your

son in prayer. Carol B (welcome to the group)

>

> My name is and I am new to the group. My 3 yr old son has

> Cancer and well start 43 days of radiation to his forearm this

Monday.

> Our Naturopathic Dr prescribed iodine after we asked him about his

high

> glucose, anion gap, and urea creatin blood counts. I do plan or

reading

> the research available at the site but wanted to make sure it was

safe

> to take with radiation. Any thoughts?

>

April 14, 2007

Hi

First I am not medically trained but I will give some suggestions for your Naturopathic Dr to consider. Dr Brownstein sometimes suggest a Cayce type iodine, Detoxified Iodine for children. That is an iodine that has been through an electromagnetic field of 10 amps for 5 minutes according to Edgar Cayce set of instructions 358-2. That was state of the arts from a Cayce point of view until amfew years ago. The iodine molecule is charged and easier for the body to use (according to EC.) Detoxified Iodine is the Brand best known.

Then it became apparent that it could not do the same job it had done in the 1930's during EC's day. Much of this information is available at

http://health. groups.. com/group/ iodine/files/ 90%20Miscellaneo us%20Information /%27s% 20Info%20on% 20Nascent% 20%20Iodine/

Because we needed to control severe malaria and not just mild we discovered EC reading 358-1. It had a much harder, longer formula, 30 amps resistance for 15 minutes to produce iodine in the atomic state. (Not radioactive, just the iodine molecule is broke into atoms - hence the name then was called atomidine, in the 1930's but unfortunately not similar to atomidine of today.) Sorry if this is confusing but checking the link and info may help. You will see Electrodine mentioned on this site. That product is made to the 30 amps procedure to the best of my knowledge. I have no idea how Detoxified Iodine is made to now, they seem a bit confused. I have not spoken directly to them, so it is hearsay.

To your ND, the thing is a very little of the iodine in the Nascent State can do a great deal of good. If he wants to check it out in the patented applications of Nascent iodine at the US Patent and Trademarks Office. Consumable nascent iodine is active in the nascent state for about 3 hours, so a small amount in water is best. More info is at the link above.

Your son is in my prayers. B

Radiation

My name is and I am new to the group. My 3 yr old son has Cancer and well start 43 days of radiation to his forearm this Monday. Our Naturopathic Dr prescribed iodine after we asked him about his high glucose, anion gap, and urea creatin blood counts. I do plan or reading the research available at the site but wanted to make sure it was safe to take with radiation. Any thoughts?

Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell? Check out

new cars at Autos.

June 23, 2007

Hi Espaules,

It's only controversial if you haven't had a good look at your

sciences.

First look up the defintion of ionization.

Then recall the model you were probably taught in school of elements

with the little electrons on the rings outside of the proton.

When that goes to something else, that is ionization, sometimes

called oxidation, or redox. What they neglected to tell you is that

is material radioactivity with radiation.

Then read the paper I mentioned. Look up the references and read the

articles. We could've made a whole book of just the references, but

this already more than twice as long as most of the papers expected

for the symposium.

Just after the deadline it was submitted by, I ran across a couple

more very plain studies on the regular news websites. Try googling

microwaves cause DNA breakage, or something along those lines. One

article was specific to microwaves.

The only difference between one end of the spectrum and the other is

the frequency, the speed it does the damage at. This can be

manipulated and transformed. Probably more of that will become

available to the public in just the next couple years the way

technology is snowballing. But it is particularly through people like

us who can be the most helpful in finding what are the best means not

only of shielding, but converting to helpful methods.

Using the sound generators, or other devices that generate

frequencies are already doing this. What I think is missing, at least

I haven't found it yet, is a clear " recipe " for mixing. " If you apply

this frequency to that you get this. " Sound cancellation technology

is right in there with this idea.

Hope that helps.

~ Snoshoe

>> Hi Snoshoe

>

> How has all radiation been shown to be Ionizing, has this been

observed and

> recorded and by what means, cos obviously this is a very

contravercial

> statement.

>

> UK

>

> In a message dated 6/22/2007 12:45:18 AM GMT Daylight Time,

> snoshoe_2@... writes:

>

> The short summary is that all radiation, whether by chemical or

> photon is ionizing. Demyelinization is a huge problem from that.

>

> THAT,-radiation-is your biophysical answer. The

> individuals overall exposure and constitution they started with.

>

June 23, 2007

In a message dated 6/23/2007 5:55:40 PM GMT Daylight Time,

snoshoe_2@... writes:

Using the sound generators, or other devices that generate

frequencies are already doing this. What I think is missing, at least

I haven't found it yet, is a clear " recipe " for mixing. " If you apply

this frequency to that you get this. " Sound cancellation technology

is right in there with this idea.

Hope that helps.

~ Snoshoe

Like the beach I am always happy to recive new waves that push the old

stones aside - THANKS

September 27, 2007

Dan, I found this article, I think it might help.http://hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q638.htmlGlenn Sykes, DCNewberg Or 97132503-538-5433 Radiation

Hi all

Interesting question from a patient this am.

How long does X-ray radiation stay in the system(s)?

Anyone know the answer?

Danno

October 22, 2008

Was it on the package insert or on the website you ordered from. I am just

curious.

Steph

Radiation

>I googled it & whatever it meant I see it provides support for

> radiation poisening so thats good.

>

> ------------------------------------

>

March 19, 2011

From: Jon Abrahamson <jonabrahamson55@...>Subject: Radiation"guy fix" <guyfix1@...>, "Lori B." <bpkilledplanetearth@...>, "Rob" <onestupidman@...>, "Michele" <praeeo@...>, "" <kflowerzz@...>, "Jeff Peet" <peetjeff@...>, " Larson" <pauleriklarson@...>, vaughnwilliamtaylor@..., "Marielle " <marielle_vanessa@...>Cc: jonabrahamson55@...Date: Saturday, March 19, 2011, 5:17 PM

Friends,

I grabbed my Manual out that I got when I worked at the Monticello Nuclear Powerplant. It was provided by the NMC (Nuclear Management Corp.) I has the limits of the USNRC (United States Nuclear Reglitory Commision).

There are 3 radioactive sourses to be concerned about.

Proton

Neutron

electron

There are 4 types of Radiation and measurement.

Alpha

Beta

Neutron

Gamma

ALPHA radiation is a particle, has the following characteristics

A) source is reactor fuel and radon gas.

has the penetrating power of any of the 4 types above. Travel in air is just an inch or two and has a large electrical charge.

C) It can be sheilded by a sheet of paper, by dead skin and clothing.

D) Is primarily an internal hazard. It can result in a high dose if inhaled or ingested.

BETA radiation particle

A) Sourse is activated corrosion and fission products found in fluid within the piping system.

Has more penetrating power than alpha, but is limited to a few feet in air or a few layers of skin. It can be sheilded by clothing, eyeglasses, plastic, or any thin metal like aluminum foil. (get out your tin foil hats) LOL A joke!

C) External Beta radiation is primarily a hazard to living skin tissue below the outer dead skin layer and to the lens of the eye if unshielded. Beta emitting radioactive material inside the body may cause significant dose to surrounding internal tissue.

GAMMA radiation is NOT a particle: it's pure energy with no mass.

A) Primary source is fission, fission products, and activation products with in the piping including steam.

has great penitrating power. It can penetrate the entire body. It's best shielded by very dense material like lead, concrete, and steel. Water can also be used for shielding. The thicker the shielding material the more gamma that is absorbed.

C) Exposure to gamma radiation results in a Whole Body Dose. Most radiation recieved will be this type.

NEUTRON radiation is part of the atomic nucleus thats been freed by fission or decay.

A) Primary sourse is nuclear fission.

Has great penitrating power. It's best shielded by water or concrete or anything with a high hydrogen content.

C)Exposure to neutron radiation will result in a Whole Body Dose. This radiation occurs in the containment or drywell while the reactor is opperating.

Dose, Dose Rate, and TEDE

The unit of Dose is measured in REM. This term measures ionizing radiation absorbed on terms of it's estimated biological effects. A sub unit is Is millirem (mrem), this is 1/1000 of a rem. Note: the general public recieves about 360mrem a year.

Dose rate is the amount of a dose multiplied by time of exposure.

Total Effective Dose Equivalent is a measure of an individuals total whole body dose This combines internal and external doses added together.

The numbers

0 - 25 rem No Observable effects.

25 - 100 rem Slight blood changes, no other observable effects.

100 - 200 rem Vomiting, neasea and diarrhea may occur within 3 hours of exposure. Moderate blood changes are possible. Except for blood-forming system, recovery WILL occure in essentially in all cases within a few weeks.

200 - 600 rem Vomiting for most people occurs within 3 hours. Loss of hai after 2 weeks, severe blood changes, hemorrhaging, and infection. Death may occur. Recovery period from one month to a year.

600 - 1000 rem Vomiting occurs with in an hour. Severe blood changes, hemorrhage, infection, and hair loss. Probable death is at 80% within 2 months. Survivors convalesce over a long period of time.

A lot of people are freaking out, and rightly so. People are coming out with ficticious measurements and progressing the hysteria! I have been guilty of that myself. But better to be safe than dead! The Gamma & Neutron radiation is what killed those workers at Chernobyl! If you recall the people from Nagasaki and Hiroshima survived alot of the effects from just there clothes. Most likely those higher numbers are a mrem measurement. These number are straight form the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

I hope this clears some things up.

March 19, 2011