Response to Sakuramane2004 - ☢ Radioactive Playground Sand ☢

[GoddardsJournal]

FYI: there are other radiation monitoring databases in Japan that are much more robust than radiationnetwork. See links in my profile: " Japan radiation mapping "

[sakuramane2004]

I don't think I thanked you enough for spending the time to help me out.

thank you. If you come to Japan let me know. I am in yokosuka and you are welcome to stay with us (if my husband oks it or with one of my friends)

[GoddardsJournal]

It's worth noting that there are two types of radiation exposure: Internal and External. Of the two, internal exposure by oral ingestion or inhalation posses greater health risks.

When you say your sofa emits radiation, your exposure is only external. Your sofa shouldn't exposure you to cesium 137 that could find its way inside your body. Risk-assessments that equate internal and external exposure fall short of the required level of concern. And very-young kids will put sand in their mouths.

[antiprotons]

@GoddardsJournal This is totally correct. Breathing in the material is the worst. Injestion is not as bad as much of the material leaves you, but some can still be quite nasty. Uranium can build up in your kidneys and strontium 90 is a bone seaker. The point is to determine if the play sand is above background. if the sand is the same as background, and if the background has not changed since the event, it may be safe. Take it to a university/lab to be sure. For my child, I would.

[mtzlypk]

you just reminded me of what an idiot i am when it comes to equations..anybody that understands this beats me hands down..but i appreciate the effort...oh yes if you were to ask a general physician here in america about radiation , i dont think they would have a clue?i worked with many dr.in er for 6 yrs. and for all you folks that think drs. are idiot proof , you would be wrong.ive met drs. that are drunks,addicts,attrocious bedside manner,and remember theres a top of the class and the bottom!

[antiprotons]

@mtzlypk Well, doctors also claim Tc99m is safe. They send people out into the public emitting 100 to 200 uSv/hr of gamma (tc99m measured by GM referenced to gamma at 661 keV).

Always think for yourself. lol

[edpotkay1]

So if the larger sensor will read 3 times more which one is correct?

[antiprotons]

@edpotkay1 That is the point: they are both correct. If a 1" diameter cup catches 100 drops of water and a 3" diameter cup catches 300 drops, they both caught the same dropsmper square inch of area. The larger contains more water in total. A small scintellator might read 2000 CPM where your GM shows 100. They are both correct. Reading and understanding a GM is more complex than i see many people considering.

[antiprotons]

@edpotkay1 this is why it is so important to understand the device and situation. The GM in saint louis has a probe three times the size of mine, so his 600 CPM rain water would be 200 CPM on mine. Reporting it in mR/hr is no good unless he knows what he is measuring. I often use the sum of the aggregate probabllities of a collectionnof possible elements tmes their energies, divided by their abundance in the set and multiplied by the reading, as a set problem.

[edpotkay1]

@antiprotons Ya obviously he was wrong. 60x backround, give me a break. Not sure who that guy is but I am starting to think he is working with duch.. Fear mongering people to get views, a partnership on youtube which in my opinion is WRONG!!!!!!. I am not paranoid by any means, I just want the truth. I think people deserve to know what is going on, and what the long term affects will be

[antiprotons]

Note: The main points of the video are 1. The details of the reading are as important as the reading. I need to know what type of unit took those readings. 2. The background radiation is very important to consider. If your background is 20 CPM, than a spot test of 22 is not high. If your background is 10, that changes things. In short, I am not saying it is or is not high. More detail is needed. Ask your doctor for a second opinion too. Can you provide more detail Sakuramane2004?