WOW LOL LOL LOL LOL

This world, you just gotta laugh at it. LOL

And remind me to promote please.

I have a friend at work with this color Fiestware plate. That is a VERY sensitive meter so it sounds like a crapload of radiation but more mundane geigers wont make you think you are about to die.

It's not made that clear in the video, but the reason he says that the plate is safe to store and handle, but not eat off is because Uranium 238 is usually an alpha emitter. Alpha radiation doesn't penetrate skin that well, but it is very dangerous when ingested and the soft tissues become exposed to it. Please correct me if I'm wrong there.

>> ^ghark:

It's not made that clear in the video, but the reason he says that the plate is safe to store and handle, but not eat off is because Uranium 238 is usually an alpha emitter. Alpha radiation doesn't penetrate skin that well, but it is very dangerous when ingested and the soft tissues become exposed to it. Please correct me if I'm wrong there.


Depends on if you believe in radiation hormesis or linear no-threshold model . Most likely the truth is somewhere in-between (which by default makes hormesis "more" accurate). In the end, though, it is always best to avoid ingesting heavy metals, radioactive or not.

Learning lots about radiation as of late. There is a lot of fear factor behind it, even though our daily lives are pretty much consumed with radiation...NEATO! Bones full of radioactive carbon, potassium, you name it, you most likely have lots of radioactive isotopes of it Once again, truth stranger than fiction

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

>> ^ghark:
It's not made that clear in the video, but the reason he says that the plate is safe to store and handle, but not eat off is because Uranium 238 is usually an alpha emitter. Alpha radiation doesn't penetrate skin that well, but it is very dangerous when ingested and the soft tissues become exposed to it. Please correct me if I'm wrong there.

Depends on if you believe in radiation hormesis or linear no-threshold model . Most likely the truth is somewhere in-between (which by default makes hormesis "more" accurate). In the end, though, it is always best to avoid ingesting heavy metals, radioactive or not.
Learning lots about radiation as of late. There is a lot of fear factor behind it, even though our daily lives are pretty much consumed with radiation...NEATO! Bones full of radioactive carbon, potassium, you name it, you most likely have lots of radioactive isotopes of it Once again, truth stranger than fiction


I find the argument between those two models quite fascinating, they both make sense TBH. One interesting thing I found out recently was the enormous difference in radiation exposure between regular x-ray's and CT scans when visiting the doctor. It makes sense that CT scans expose you to more radiation because they make multiple passes to get a better image - however the difference astonished me - a regular chest xray would expose you to 0.06 mSv while a helical CT scan of the chest would expose you to 8 mSV - thirten hundred and thirty three times as much radiation (although the effective dose only ends up being about one hundred times as much). As a comparison point, the typical human is exposed to 2-3 mSv per year, so with a helical chest CT you're getting 3 years worth of radiation in a few seconds.

Is either model even relavent? aplha radiation has a hard time passing through a single sheet of paper or just several metres of air never mind layers of skin. I'm not sure how much beta or even gamma radiation you might be getting from the decay products though. I definitely wouldn't want to eat off it.

Part of the UK have sufficiently high radiation from radon gas that nuclear sites cannot be opened there because they'd already exceed legal radiation limits. I'd like to know what the cancer rates are like in those areas.

I might be wrong but it wouldn't surprise me to find out that they are pretty much normal.

[edited to add:] Not that I'm trying to say that radiation's not dangerous or anything like that. I left my tinfoil hat in the closet where it belongs.

>> ^Jinx:

Is either model even relavent? aplha radiation has a hard time passing through a single sheet of paper or just several metres of air never mind layers of skin. I'm not sure how much beta or even gamma radiation you might be getting from the decay products though. I definitely wouldn't want to eat off it.
Part of the UK have sufficiently high radiation from radon gas that nuclear sites cannot be opened there because they'd already exceed legal radiation limits. I'd like to know what the cancer rates are like in those areas.

>> ^ghark:
a regular chest xray would expose you to 0.06 mSv while a helical CT scan of the chest would expose you to 8 mSV - thirten hundred and thirty three times as much radiation (although the effective dose only ends up being about one hundred times as much).
If you mean the same thing with "mSv" both times (and not jumping between milli and micro or anything like that), then you're off by a factor of 10. 8 / 0.06 = 133.333333, not 1333 like you said. And if the effective dose follows the same pattern, then the CT scan would be about 10 times as much as the x-ray, though I don't know anything about that part.