4 ms·
This article mentions four elements, iodine-131 and 132, tellurium-132 and cesium-134 and 137, and then focuses on the one with the short half life. Isn't cesi
by stretchwithme 16y ago
This article mentions four elements, iodine-131 and 132, tellurium-132 and cesium-134 and 137, and then focuses on the one with the short half life. Isn't cesium dangerous for a lot longer? Or is iodine the problem because it collects easily in the human body?
- gammarator 16y agoCs-137 has a half life of 30 years, so yes, it is the longer term risk. However, the "biological half-life" of cesium is only about 70 days [1], so it leaves the body relatively quickly. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cs-137#Health_risk_of_radioactive_caesium http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cs-137#Health_risk_of_radioacti...
- brazzy 16y agoIntensity of radiation is the inverse of half life. The shorter the half life, the more dangerous a nuclide is while you're exposed to it.
- iwwr 16y agoBiological half life is the time the body takes to eliminate half the substance in question (or half the toxicity thereof). In this case, the shorter the half life, the less dangerous the specific thing is.
- stretchwithme 16y agoMakes sense to me. A thing with a half life of forever isn't radiating at all.