3 ms·

Would you happen to have a source for this? I'm finding it hard to imagine how a study like this can even take place given that there have (probably) not been m

• cperciva 16y ago
  I don't know of any studies on people with such large doses of radiation, no -- but it's believed that cancer risk from radiation is proportional to the dosage received, and lots of studies have been done looking at populations in areas with higher/lower levels of background radiation.
  • Ratfish 16y ago
    It should be noted that UNSCREAR use the linear no threshold theory despite the lack of evidence regarding lower doses . Err on the side of safety.
• DennisP 16y ago
  There's a recent book called Physics for Future Presidents, written by a physics professor at Berkeley, which has a lot of material on radiation risks. He says you can calculate your risk of cancer from radiation by dividing your exposure by 2500 rem. The level that gives you acute radiation sickness is 200 rem. This is called the "linear hypothesis" and is widely used. They use it in medicine to decide if diagnostic scans are worth the risk. The risk could actually be lower; some scientists think there's a threshold below which there's no risk. There's too much statistical uncertainty at low exposure levels to know for sure.
  • Lost_BiomedE 16y ago
    The class is available as open courseware, too. It is a no math physics course that focuses on concepts. This is the course site, click webcast lectures on the side: http://muller.lbl.gov/teaching/physics10/pffp.html http://muller.lbl.gov/teaching/physics10/pffp.html