> Except there's no real evidence this ever hurt anyone? According to Wikipedia, "monitoring of American salespersons found dose rates at pelvis height of up t

> Except there's no real evidence this ever hurt anyone? According to Wikipedia, "monitoring of American salespersons found dose rates at pelvis height of up to 95 R/week, with an average of 7.1 R/week. (Up to ~50 mSv/yr, avg ~3.7 mSv/yr effective dose) A 2007 paper suggested that even higher doses of 0.5 Sv/yr were plausible." There were a number of cases affecting salespeople that were linked to the use of shoe-fitting fluoroscopes. OP was criticizing irresponsible use of X-rays, not dismissing X-rays altogether. Given what we know about X-rays today, shoestore fluoroscopes seem an incredibly bad idea in hindsight. And given what we know about nanoparticles today, this nanotech seems like an incredible bad idea right now. Not bad enough to ban, but bad enough to regulate.