No announcement yet.

low levels of radiation

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • low levels of radiation

    Heres some conflicting infomation.

    I remember watching on discovery channel that chenobyl survivors didnt have an increased cancer risk.

    But we all know radon is the 2nd leading cause of lung cancer after ciggarettes.

    Ramsar has naturally very high radiation (260 mSv) due to its geology but is found to have no increased cancer risk
    A single full-body CT scan gives a person a total radiation dose of about 12 mSv. That's close to the 20-mSv dose linked to cancer in Japanese survivors of atomic bombs. And each of these scans adds another 12 mSv to a person's total lifetime exposure. An mSv is a unit for measuring radiation dose.

    Sorry if this is in the wrong forum.
    Last edited by Michael112; 10-31-06, 05:19 AM.
    Aged 23 ;; 09/06 left I/O ;; Markers normal ;; 100% Seminoma Stage 1. ;; 10x8x16mm & 7x7x8mm ;; rete testis invasion. ;; no vascular invasion. ;; surveillance. ;; HRT.

  • #2
    I read that a single abdominal CT scan will deliver 14-21 milliGy to that area. Compare that with the minimum of 25 Gy in radiotherapy.

    In a ten year follow up I expect 23 CT scans by surveillance. I'll receive approximately 460 milliGy, or ~1/50th of the 25,000 milliGy dose that I will get by radiotherapy.

    Michael, I would not even consider skipping CT scans to reduce this radiation. Between the theoretical cancer I might get by radiation, and the very real cancer I know I had, I'd rather treat the one I have.
    Detected mass 10-6-06, Radical left I/O 10-10-06, Stage I seminoma, 1.5 cm primary, No LV invasion, No Rete Testis Invasion... Currently on Surveillance.


    • #3
      I wouldnt skip a CT scan, I am not bothered by them.
      Whats funny is, as a kid I always hated the thought of a nuclear war, I wasnt fearfull of it cause I knew it is so unlikely, but I remember watching some movie on chynobal and that twilight zone where they freeze time as a nuclear warhead is falling above them, and I was under the impression if you copped any radiation your kids would be deformed and you would slowly slowly die.

      In Europe there are spas and old uranium mines that give off low doses of radiation and people pay money to goto them, there is no evidance of low doses of radiation causing cancer, it was even on discovery channel, and discovery channel never lies.
      FHM did an article on chynobal and there is this old lady that lives there still, in a ghost town they interviewed her, the whole place was freaky cause it was one big modern day ghost town with a delapidated ferris wheel and all.
      Originally posted by Mike Bohan, Radiation Safety Officer
      People in the United States receive, on average, about 3.6 mSv annually and, in some areas of the world, natural radiation levels have been measured as high as 260 mSv/yr. The people who live in these areas receive radiation levels approximately equivalent to 10 CT scans each year of their lives. However, we cannot demonstrate that they have significantly different cancer or mutation rates from populations living in low background radiation areas.
      Last edited by Michael112; 10-31-06, 11:29 PM.
      Aged 23 ;; 09/06 left I/O ;; Markers normal ;; 100% Seminoma Stage 1. ;; 10x8x16mm & 7x7x8mm ;; rete testis invasion. ;; no vascular invasion. ;; surveillance. ;; HRT.


      • #4
        I read the articAL about Japan too

        Japanese survivors of atomic bombs were exposed to this on a daily basis not for just 2 minutes.
        The residual radiation must have been astounding!

        My uroligist kinda joked and said "who knows all the xrays and CT's may be enough"
        10/09/06 -- pT1-pNx-Mx-S0