New Texas radiation rule takes effect May 1 By Eric Barnes, AuntMinnie.com staff writer March 28, 2013 – Hoping to avoid the rash of radiation overexposures that shook California radiology like an earthquake a few years back, the state of Texas has decided to implement its own radiation exposure rule beginning May 1.
Unlike the California law, however, Texas will administer its new regime as an administrative directive by the Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS).
Texas Administrative Code rule §289.227 includes guidelines for radiation reporting, training personnel, and establishing acceptable dose thresholds, according to department spokesperson Christine Mann.
“The major thing in the new rule would be requiring healthcare providers that perform fluoroscopically guided interventional procedures and CT to develop a radiation protocol committee,” Mann told AuntMinnie.com. “Another change is the requirement for radiation safety awareness — that’s for physicians or those delegated by a physician to perform interventional fluoroscopy or CT, but it doesn’t apply to radiologists or oncologists.”
By May 1, all healthcare providers using fluoroscopy and CT must have a radiation program in place, the department wrote in its announcement of the new program on March 1.
“The program must record patient radiation dose on all CT and fluoroscopy exams ([CT dose index], [dose-length product], and air kerma values), establish and manage radiation dose thresholds on all CT and fluoroscopy procedures, notify patients of dose threshold breech, and provide good radiation safety training to all staff members performing CT and fluoroscopy procedures,” DSHS wrote.
The actual dose for the patients need not be calculated for each procedure, but the radiologist is responsible for maintaining a record of the radiation output information, and using that information to estimate the radiation dose, Mann explained.
“They have to record that and make sure it’s documented in the patient health record,” Mann said. “They have to maintain a record of the radiation output, and then use that data to estimate the radiation dose to the skin if necessary.”
In addition to all CT scans, common fluoroscopy procedures covered by the law include the following (without limitation):
- Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation
- Embolization of any lesion in any location
- Stroke therapy
- Biliary drainage
- Stent-graft placement
- Carotid stent placement
- Angiography and intervention for gastrointestinal hemorrhage
- Radiofrequency ablation
- Complex placement of cardiac electrophysiology devices
- Percutaneous coronary interventions
As for CT, CT dose index volume (CTDIvol) and dose-length product (DLP) are the most common output measures that require reporting under the new regime.
In the event a patient receives an overdose — that is, if the recorded dose output exceeds the threshold established by the protocol committee — the provider is required to report the incident to Texas DSHS according to Texas Administrative Code §289.231(hh) and (ii), Mann toldAuntMinnie.com…… http://www.auntminnie.com/index.aspx?sec=ser&sub=def&pag=dis&ItemID=102964
Global warming cause of harsher winters? http://main.omanobserver.om/node/158846, 30 March 2013 By Richard Ingham and Claire Snegaroff — Millions of people in northern Europe are still battling snow and ice, wondering why they are being punished with bitter cold when — officially — spring has arrived and Earth is in the grip of global warming. Yet some scientists, eyeing the fourth year in a row of exceptionally harsh late-winter weather in parts of Europe and North America, suggest warming is precisely the problem.
In a complex tango between ocean and atmosphere, warming is causing icy polar air to be displaced southwards, they contend. “The linkage is becoming clearer and clearer, I think, although the science has not yet been settled,” said Dim Coumou of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) near Berlin.
The theory derives from a long-studied Arctic phenomenon called a positive feedback — in plain words, a vicious circle. Rising temperatures are melting the Arctic’s floating cap of sea ice, especially in summer. In 1979, when satellite measurements began, summer ice covered some seven million square kilometres, roughly equivalent to 90 per cent the area of Australia. In September 2012, summer ice hit its lowest extent on record, at just 3.4 million sq kms.
Take away reflective ice, and you have a dark sea that absorbs solar radiation, which in turn reinforces the melting, and so on. But the theory suggests the added heat, stored over a vast area of surface water, is also gradually released into the atmosphere during the Arctic autumn.
It increases air pressure and moisture in the Arctic, reducing the temperature differential with lower latitudes. Here’s what happens next: The polar vortex, a powerful circular wind that essentially pens Arctic air to the roof of the world, begins to weaken.
Finding itself released, a mass of moist cold air spills southward, bringing snow and chill down into North America and Europe. And it tends to stay there, because of what happens to the jet stream.
Instead of encircling the northern hemisphere in a sturdy and predictable fashion, this high-altitude wind takes a lazy looping path, zigzagging over the United States, the Atlantic and Europe. The southern parts of the loops get a bout of cold weather that becomes stalled in place.
“Heat that is stored in the (Arctic) ocean can rapidly transfer to the atmosphere, and this affects the dynamics” of northern hemisphere weather patterns, said Coumou in a phone interview.
“We’ve had a couple of winters (in Europe) where you’ve had rather shorter-term cold spells, of a duration of maybe 10, 20, 30 days… It’s been the same in the continental US and Canada where they’ve seen similar quite bizarre cold spells but of a relatively shorter period.”
Charles Greene, director of the Ocean Resources and Ecosystems Programme at Cornell University in New York, said Arctic warming added a joker or two to the climate pack.
“With the changes in sea ice, we set up a situation where we stack the deck, increasing the probability of these invasions of cold Arctic air,” he said.
“But what’s less predictable is which regions in the mid-latitudes will get hit. We’re not sure yet how it will interact with other parts of the climate system in any given year, for instance how it will interact with El Nino and La Nina.”
Greene also postulates that Superstorm Sandy last October wreaked its havoc because of a high-pressure zone over Greenland, possibly strengthened by changes triggered by sea-ice loss in the Arctic.
Like a barrier closing off a street, this mass of air forced Sandy to turn sharply west so that it slammed into the US East Coast. Normally, late-season hurricanes follow a northeastern track and peter out at sea.
The warming-and-winter scenario is far from unanimous in climatology. Other experts call for more evidence, especially from longer-term data.
“Looking at what’s happening right now, in early spring, it’s too early to say whether it is due in part to a temporary climatic swing,” said David Salas-y-Melia of Meteo France, the French meteorological agency.
Jeff Knight of Britain’s Met Office pointed to a natural climate variation called the North Atlantic Oscillation, whose phases tend to span 30-40 years.
Several decades of relatively harsher winters alternate with relatively milder ones — but there can also be years within these phases that buck the trend.
“In Europe, the effect of climate variability is quite large,” said Knight. “There are possible links to explain why sea ice might influence atmospheric circulation, but the jury is very much still out at the moment.”
Their first piece of disinformation is to confuse the effects of external and internal radiation.
Entering the body, these elements – called internal emitters – migrate to specific organs such as the thyroid, liver, bone, and brain, continuously irradiating small volumes of cells with high doses of alpha, beta and/or gamma radiation, and over many years often induce cancer.
Fukushima: Nuclear Apologists Play Shoot the Messenger on Radiation Dr Helen Caldicott global research.ca March 15th, 2013 ”………Their first piece of disinformation is to confuse the effects of external and internal radiation. The former is what populations were exposed to when atomic bombs were detonated over Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.
Internal radiation, by contrast, emanates from radioactive elements that enter the body by inhalation, ingestion, or by skin absorption. The grave effects of internal emitters are of the most profound concern at Fukushima – as indeed they continue to be at Chernobyl.
It is erroneous and misleading to use the term ”acceptable levels of external radiation” in assessing internal radiation doses. To do so is to propagate inaccuracies and to mislead the public worldwide and journalists who are seeking the truth about radiation’s hazards.
Hazardous radioactive elements being released in the sea and air around Fukushima accumulate at each step of various food chains (for example, into algae, crustaceans, small fish, bigger fish, then humans; or soil, grass, cow’s meat and milk, then humans). Entering the body, these elements – called internal emitters – migrate to specific organs such as the thyroid, liver, bone, and brain, continuously irradiating small volumes of cells with high doses of alpha, beta and/or gamma radiation, and over many years often induce cancer.
Further, many remain radioactive in the environment for long periods, posing danger for future generations.
Further, nuclear industry proponents assert that low doses of radiation produce no ill effects and are therefore safe. But, as a US National Academy of Sciences report concluded in 2007, no dose of radiation is safe, however small, including background radiation; exposure is cumulative, so that each dose (whether, for example, from a medical x-ray or from passing through the whole-body scanners soon to be introduced in Australian airports) adds to an individual’s risk of developing cancer during his or her lifetime.
Regarding Chernobyl, various seemingly reputable groups have issued differing reports on the morbidity and mortalities resulting from the 1986 radiation catastrophe. The World Health Organisation in 2005 attributed only 43 human deaths directly to the disaster and estimated an additional 4000 fatal cancers. In contrast, a 2009 report published by the New York Academy of Sciences comes to a very different conclusion. Its scientist authors estimated the number of deaths attributable to the Chernobyl meltdown at about 980,000.
Monbiot wrongly dismisses the report out of hand as worthless, but to ignore and denigrate an entire body of literature is arrogant and irresponsible……http://www.thedailysheeple.com/fukushima-nuclear-apologists-play-shoot-the-messenger-on-radiation_032013
Mars Mission to use astronaut feces as radiation shield
LONDON, MAR 03 2013, Astronauts onboard a privately-funded expedition
to Mars in 2018 will use their own feces to protect themselves against
The couple during the Inspiration Mars mission, funded by
multimillionaire Dennis Tito, and set to fly-by the Red Planet in 2018
will face cramped conditions, muscle atrophy and potential boredom.
However, their greatest health risk comes from exposure to the
radiation from cosmic rays, ‘New Scientist’ reported.
The project will develop a radiation shield for the spacecraft by
lining its walls with human waste, among other materials.
“It’s a little queasy sounding, but there’s no place for that material
to go, and it makes great radiation shielding,” said Taber MacCallum,
a member of the team funded by Tito who announced the audacious plan
Solid and liquid human waste products would be put into bags and used
as a radiation shield – as well as being dehydrated so that any water
can be recycled for drinking, McCallum said.
“Dehydrate them as much as possible, because we need to get the water
back,” he said.
“Those solid waste products get put into a bag, put right back against
the wall,” said MacCallum, adding food too could be used as a
“Food is going to be stored all around the walls of the spacecraft,
because food is good radiation shielding,” he said.
This would not be dangerous as the food would merely be blocking the
radiation, it would not become a radioactive source, the report said.
Water has long been suggested as a shielding material for
interplanetary space missions.
“Water is better than metals for protection,” said Marco Durante of
the Technical University of Darmstadt in Germany.
That is because nuclei are the things that block cosmic rays, and
water molecules, made of three small atoms, contain more nuclei per
volume than a metal.
the melted core cracked the containment vessel, there really is no containment. So as soon as they pump the water in it leaks out again.
Loss of containment of nuclear fuel also exists within the spent fuel pools at Fukushima.
Fukushima Daiichi Reactor 3 Spent Fuel Pool – Fuel racks where refueling machine mast rests http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3A1YA1lt8k&feature=player_embedded
Nuclear Expert: “The Melted Core Cracked The Containment Vessel ” There Really Is No Containment” At Fukushima Reactors http://www.opednews.com/articles/Nuclear-Expert–The-Melte-by-G-Washington-130302-594.html Nuclear Cores and Spent Fuel Pools Have Both Lost Containment Steven Starr - Director of the Clinical Laboratory Science Program at theUniversity of Missouri/Senior Scientist at Physicians for Social Responsibility – said :
The Japanese basically lied about what happened with the reactors for months. They said they were trying to prevent a meltdown, when in fact they knew within the first couple of days Reactors 1, 2, and 3 at Fukushima Daiichi had melted down, and they actually melted through the steel containment vessels.
So there was a worst case scenario that they were trying to hide, they even knew that at that time enormous amounts of radiation were released over Japan and some of it even went over Tokyo [...]
The melted core cracked the containment vessel, there really is no containment. So as soon as they pump the water in it leaks out again.
Asahi Shimbum notes that the location of Fukushima melted fuel is unknown. It could be “scattered’ in piping, vessels … “we’ve yet to identify all hotspots” around plant. Read more »
“The entire cover-up of the effects of radiation hinges on Chernobyl. This was the most substantial release of radiation into the environment before Fukushima. Verified health effects will accurately depict the true hazard of man-made radiation released amidst populations. This is why Chernobyl effects have to be covered up by [the nuclear establishment by] any and every means”
Powerful Lies – The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster And The Radioactive Effects On Human Health By Richard Wilcox PhD 2-22-13 Rense.com,“Even one atom of uranium undergoing alpha decay has the potential for creating a fatal cancer.” – Paul Zimmerman, A Primer in the Art of Deception (1; p. 53)
“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous, and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James (2)
“It ain’t what we don’t know that causes all the trouble, it’s what we do know that ain’t so.” – a saying from Jim in Texas (Ibid.)
“The first rule of holes: when you’re in one, stop digging.” – Molly Ivins (3)
The Trouble We Are In Read more »
1. Ontario Power Generation (OPG), a multi-billion dollar corporation wholly owned by the Province of Ontario, plans to build a nuclear waste dump at the Bruce Nuclear Power Plant site, Municipality of Kincardine, Ontario “located approximately 1 km inland from the shore of Lake Huron at the surface and more than 400 metres below the deepest near-site point of Lake Huron.” http://tinyurl.com/arc34y2 , page 55 OPG owns all Ontario’s nuclear plants and all radioactive nuclear waste created. Read more »
Millions of dollars and labor hours are being spent moving nuclear waste from bad tanks into good tanks. Then millions more will be spent on vitrification. But single-shell or double shell, peanut butter or glass, it will still be nuclear waste. There is no getting rid of it. There is only finding more convenient, less uncomfortable ways to deal. .
At The Hanford Nuclear Reservation, A Steady Drip Of Toxic Trouble by Eric Nusbaum Feb 24, 2013 Eric Nusbaum tours the largest environmental cleanup operation the United States government has ever undertaken. “……There are 200 square miles of contaminated groundwater under Hanford. Every day that water moves closer to the Columbia River. Not coincidentally, there are also 177 massive storage tanks on the site, each built to hold between 55,000 and more than 100,000 gallons of nuclear waste. Read more »
Powerful Lies – The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster And The Radioactive Effects On Human Health By Richard Wilcox PhD 2-22-13 Rense.com,
“…….The nuclear establishment would prefer the general public believe that nuclear radiation is essentially nothing to be concerned with. However, their own science and words belie the rhetoric. The Cult of Nuclearists have billions of dollars to devote to propaganda whereas the Nuclear Truth Tellers (NTTers) are marginalized by a whole host of economic and political tricks. One of the trump cards that the Nuclearists hold is that understanding the science of radiation effects when presented in an intentionally confusing way to mislead is beyond the capabilities of the average person to grasp, and that they have no other choice than to trust the experts. Fortunately there is a large body of literature that debunks the nuclear industry’s powerful lies.
Busby has two important and rigorously researched books on radiation science that are among the most important (31; 32). I also recommend a perusal through longtime activist Russell Hoffman’s incredible library of nuclear related books (33). Hoffman’s “Code Killers” is an easily understood, exhaustively researched and colorfully presented educational primer on the dangers of nuclear energy. It can be downloaded for free and is an ideal educational tool (34). Read more »
New 3-D Mammography is Basically a CT Scan for Breasts
The procedures give women twice as much radiation as a standard mammogram
New 3D Mammography Significantly Increases Radiation Exposure, and Your Risk of Radiation-Induced Cancer Mercola.com February 19, 2013 By Dr. Mercola
Breast cancer is big business, and mammography is one of its primary profit centers. This is why the industry is fighting tooth and nail to keep it, by downplaying or outright ignoring its significant risks.
In the US, women are still urged to get an annual mammogram starting at the age of 40, completely ignoring the updated guidelines set forth by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force in 2009.
Unfortunately, many women are completely unaware that the science simply does not back up the use of routine mammograms as a means to prevent breast cancer death.
As was revealed in a 2011 meta-analysis by the Cochrane Database of Systemic Reviews, mammography breast cancer screening led to 30 percent overdiagnosis and overtreatment, which equates to an absolute risk increase of 0.5 percent. Read more »
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- civil liberties
- Depleted uranium
- global warming
- Opposition to nuclear
- safety and incidents
- secrets and lies
- NUCLEAR COMPANIES
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES