I definitely read that part of the article, how else do you think I came up with that 90 rem / year number?? That does does not "cover" my question though. Per

I definitely read that part of the article, how else do you think I came up with that 90 rem / year number?? That does does not "cover" my question though. Perhaps you didn't actually read or comprehend my question? I was wondering whether the radiation dose rates for tissue near the device is more concerning than the whole body dose. This might seem fairly obvious, but I'm no medical expert (and either way it's still not covered by the article). And it is intended to be read in the context in which it was asked. Glad I could help clear that up for you, you're welcome.