37 ms·

The pool. But it isn't necessarily a problem - your hair, right now, is radioactive. Presumably wouldn't trip a measuring device because it'd be background leve

by roenxi 1y ago

The pool. But it isn't necessarily a problem - your hair, right now, is radioactive. Presumably wouldn't trip a measuring device because it'd be background levels. The linked report doesn't say how radioactive his hair is or give any indication of whether the person in question is threatened by this reading. Could be bad, could be nothing, we just know it is higher than normal.

ComplexSystems 1y ago
It says "The individual was decontaminated by radiation protection personnel but had 300 counts per minute detected in their hair."
- roenxi 1y ago
  It does say that. Can you translate that into a measurement of radioactivity & medical risk? I don't think it is obvious. EDIT The report below it seems to literally be "nothing interesting happened". The thresholds here for something to be reportable are very low. Frankly I don't know why this story is upvoted so much but I'm not about to make a bigger deal about it than one sentence.
  - sithadmin 1y ago
    300cpm is lower than what you’d be exposed to on a commercial airline flight (400-900ish cpm).
    - doetoe 1y ago
      But is that the same thing? 300cpm says something about the risk to someone near the worker, not about what the worker has been exposed to
    - gblargg 1y ago
      CPM is a function of the detector sensitivity/size and radiation level.
- madaxe_again 1y ago
  For reference, this is about the same in your hair that you’d get from a few hours in a pub in the 90s, never mind working in one - surprising amount of radiation in cigarette smoke from polonium and lead-210.