How Much is Too Much?

The radiation dose you receive from a large variety of human activities including eating bananas, living at higher elevation, xrays, airplane flights and being near nuclear accident sites such as Three Mile Island, Fukushima, and Chernobyl. Comparison to the legal limits for workers and the general public. Health effects of different radiation doses all the way up to the lethal dose. Excess deaths vs radiation does explained in detail including both the linear hypothesis and the threshold hypothesis for eventually contracting cancer. Radium-dial watch painters example for exposure and effect.

[@D00ml0rdKazzak]

It's criminal these lectures have so few views.

[@Tenebrousable]

Sure, but also, these videos have easily more views than the professors has met students during his life, let alone teached. Wealth has been saved. Information has been propagated. It's not all hopeless.

[@CED99]

Hit the thumbs up and tell the algorithm!

[@CED99]

@@Tenebrousable it's taught, more information has been propagated. Please don't worry, your point and comment are excellent 👌

[@F1fan4eva]

Tells you where society is, doesn't it?

[@bugpack6]

Love his way of teaching. Keeps me alert and focused the entire time!

[@UnOrigionalOne]

Wish more people were informed about this info. Hysteria is much more dangerous than radiation.

[@AndreasDelleske]

UnOriginalOne just inhale one speck of radioactive dust, you may have an alpha radiator that can almost not be measured but it fires in your lungs for the rest of your life. No one considers and 1% only knows it. „Alpha is harmless“ yeah dream on.

[@benchapple1583]

I believe 18 people died in the rush to evacuate after Fukushima. Of course if the containment building hadn't done it's job then they would have been ingesting radioactive material and that's a very different matter, but of course we all know that. Arsenic is pretty harmless until you ingest it. People seem to believe all sorts of rubbish about radioactivity and I don't think that you can change their minds.

[@FutureMartian97]

@@benchapple1583 Those people didn't die of radiation exposure. Many of them were elderly and had complications evacuating.

[@benchapple1583]

@@FutureMartian97 Oh I know. They died of panic and not their own. As soon as you say the 'N' word, everyone loses their mind.

[@AvNotasian]

@@AndreasDelleske Thats like saying imagine people inhaling one speck of steel dust from a handrail, exactly how on earth do you get the handrail to turn into dust again? You are talking about a metal, and in the case of unenriched uranium an incredibly low radioactivity. Hell your body actually is capable of removing uranium from your lungs and body since it is soluble. The concern should be for children exposed to fallout since they incorporate radio-isotopes into their bones, and although radiation is slow give it 50 years.

[@CasteMarvin]

"Sleeping next to somebody Why is it dangerous... well there could be lots of reason" LOST

[@Interestingworld4567]

Lol

[@cpanic1153]

The real mystery is the KZbin algorithm. These videos are all months old but nearly all the comments are days old

[@user-pb6nm6yb6e]

Somehow this lectures showed up in suggested videos around the world

[@AvNotasian]

@Chetar Ruby Usually there is a trigger for these rare things going semi viral. In this situation it would have been either a large group of people all discussing this topic and sharing the videos with each other so they can get up to speed. Such as people within the govt discussing something or a conference (usually conference goers would have this knowledge though). Or a class / workshop linked these videos for students to look at for study, and now that its near exam times these students are all reviewing these videos. From the perspective of the algorithm large numbers of people are randomly accessing these videos, it trys to draw a correlation and finds one and then shares the videos to all people that fit the correlation. For either of these groups since they don't really share anything in common in terms of the content they consume except entertainment the algorithm effectively causes runaway feedback. This means we as viewers can guess at why people would be viewing these videos in critical mass to trigger the algorithm, I would guess an internal govt review somewhere in the world regarding nuclear power.

[@CED99]

I'm glad of the algorithm linking these, they're both good quality and educational

[@fanfeck2844]

CPanic , I only came here after watching one of his newer videos, so I’m playing catch-up. Probably happens like this for a lot of peeps

[@davidwilkie9551]

Sheep and Goat sorting, what else?

[@michaelzlprime]

One of the best videos on the topic! As an engineer, it always fascinated me how irrational people are about radiation. This climate of fear stifles development into actual clean and truly enviormental solutions to our global problems such as climate change.

[@submijiru]

I wonder why not more people are irrationally afraid of other clean energy solutions. Maintenance-workers in wind energy are exposed to a fatal dose of gravitation, at a rate of 1 excess death per 10 billion kWh produced. Although I don't have numbers on solar, the risk of gravitation there is probably much higher due to poor practices and safety procedures.

[@CED99]

@@submijiru it's possible - Solar is typically installed at rooftop level, which is a lot less scary than a wind tower of say 100m, so people could be more blasé about safety

[@submijiru]

​@@CED99 True. People are not even slightly worried about low level gravitation, or even believe exposure has a beneficial effect for bone health. Personally, I subscribe to the linear no-threshold model that exposure can prove lethal at any dose over enough time. Crazy to see these uninformed workers not only working without safety equipment, but jumping down 3 ft ledges or casually running around without helmets (mind you, some of these guys are over 6ft tall.) Madness!

[@patrickmccurry1563]

People naturally panic about dangers they can't see or understand. Education can only help the latter.

[@JesterAzazel]

About a week ago I saw a video of someone handling uranium ore, and people in the comments were freaking out, thinking the guy was going to kill himself with the stuff.

[@olafv.2741]

At 19:40 ... There is another reason why you do not like to turn up the light when flying a bombing raid over Germany: it spoils your night vision. After turning on the light you know the time but can't see where you are going for a while. Very good lecture. The things you can do without computer animations!

[@arthurmoore9488]

Really appreciate these videos. the XKCD chart is such a great resource.

[@craterglass]

There's always a relevant XKCD.

[@Alorand]

Watching a lectures on a Webcomic... What a time to be alive.

[@cpanic1153]

A web comic with a physics degree who used to work at NASA.

[@CED99]

@@cpanic1153 what's Randall doing now? I've not read xkcd in ages?

[@1blackice1]

@@CED99 Still making comics regularly. And doing book tours and talks occasionally.

[@MWDJR173]

I am a 74D in the Army and am definitely very interested in the Nuclear & Radiological aspect of my job. Salamat kaayo for your videos regardless of it being made so long ago because they are still helpful today.

[@NicholasA231]

This should be a required lecture in our public education system. Whatever science you take in high school, one day, learn about radiation dose relative risk.

[@johns7734]

I'm reminded of the book "Innumeracy: Mathematical Illiteracy and Its Consequences" by John Allen Paulos.

[@Mo95793]

Great book

[@jermainerace4156]

@@Mo95793 I'm going to have to get it.

[@aasanchez01]

Science...once again dispels fear while teaching respect.

[@fieryspirit]

These lectures are so eye opening and informative. Easy to understand and comprehend information for the masses, everyone needs to learn this

[@KL-bi2un]

Everything is great about the lectures. Except the squeeky markers. Thx

[@memiller55]

There is an error in the part of the lecture about the Radium Girls. These exposures from 'pointing' brushes in the mouth to paint watch dials happened in the 1920's, not during World War II.

[@albapantheratigris6071]

Mark Miller Thank you, I was looking for this.

[@olafv.2741]

And from painting clock and watch dials and a lot of other things. There was a fascination with radium at the time.

[@albapantheratigris6071]

Olaf V. Yes, like radium tonics... what a world.

[@amykathleen2]

I was looking for this too. Although radium painted instrument dials were a vital part of World War II night bombing (which, over Germany, was actually done by the British, while the Americans bombed in the day), by that time the lessons of the Radium Girls and the whole crazy radium era had been learned. Of course there were many lessons still to be learned, but the safety of radium dial painters was much improved.

[@TheGreaterGrog]

Still way better than Radium Water, which was both a thing that actually existed and actually killed people back before anybody had any idea what radiation did.

[@JohnTuffin]

These are some of the best videos I've ever watched on youtube. What a remarkable teacher who can take these subjects and relate them in everyday concepts.

[@larrykent196]

Thank you for the video. Another great lesson in radiation. Teaching two things, radiation dose by knowing your subject and how to present it with confidence in a humble manner, also with a Stoic attitude, we all die, accept it.

[@ephelduath610]

Incredibly enlightening. And lectured in a manner you would understand and remember for a long time. Thanks, professor Ruzic.

[@doritoification]

God i hate how radio phobic people are. Thanks for the amazing video helping contextualise radiation and thank god you continued to change the graph showing the threshold! I almost had a seizure when you drew the straight line haha

[@tekman2000]

Fantastic teacher, very clear and concise, easy to understand..... Thank you 😊

[@michaelschwartz9485]

This has been said many times but these are the best videos! Professor Energy is pretty damn cool!

[@athgt6630]

Your students must be queuing to attend your lectures. Thank you for sharing.

[@jimlahey2905]

When he started writing backwards on the glass I was astounded and then I realized they just flipped the image. I don’t know why that’s not more popular it’s pretty cool.

[@rhyoliteaquacade]

It took me a while to figure out he is not left handed,

[@pauleohl]

Underappreciated observation.

[@annteve]

Excellent lecture.

[@Ghost_PM11]

We are not rational beings, we have trouble understanding levels of magnitude, we are afraid of things we cannot see, like radiation, whether it comes from a banana or nuclear fuel.

[@TapOnX]

Good thing I always sleep alone

[@RN-2444]

Excellent teaching sir !!!

[@MoosesValley]

Two things I have seen in other documentaries on radiation that others may find interesting: * Apparently at least some of the Radium Girls used to paint their front teeth with Radium so they glowed in the dark, to joke around at night. People didn't know there was any danger ... so I was surprised to see such "low" cancer rates at 21:40 even at higher doses. * Saw a documentary a few years ago where they compared cancer rates for people in different background radiation areas and found that people in higher background radiation areas have a lower incidence of cancer - if true, if confirmed by other studies ... maybe people build up some kind of resistance in higher background radiation areas ?

[@hosmerhomeboy]

There have been a few instances like that, but the studies really haven't been done enough. There may be some sort of repair mechanism that kicks in at the cellular level when subjected to certain types of hardships. There is also evidence that fasting, as well as some exposure to toxins or radiation could also cause this mechanism to activate. There is lots of evidence this mechanism exists, but not a lot of research into what causes it as of yet.

[@GeorgeTsiros]

@@hosmerhomeboy wouldn't be surprised if levels of background radiation is partly responsible for the process of evolution.

[@hosmerhomeboy]

@@GeorgeTsiros oh almost certainly that is a source of random mutation. Hey fun fact; there are micro organisms living in chernobyl that have adapted to the radiation and even possibly use it as an energy source.

[@WadcaWymiaru]

Our body has AWESOME ability to regenerate and kill the cancer...50 times per second XD (and some senescent cells)

[@hosmerhomeboy]

@@WadcaWymiaru That is true; it's why people occasionally just have remission and get better. The fact there is a cancer means that dozens of failsafes have failed. All it takes is for one of the mechanisms that hasn't been working yet to start working.

[@tonyduncan9852]

That should be part of the education of every person on the Earth.

[@anupkumarlathar]

I am highly obliged of your precious knowledge sharing

[@CED99]

Well done Randall Munroe!

[@douglasburnett7731]

Thank you for the information. You present information so very effectively.

[@mtube54]

Anyone else just impressed that he can write normally from BEHIND his marker board? This guy is levels ahead of us mortal humans.

[@ExpiredCartonOfEggNogg]

They mirror the video in post processing

[@pricklypetesalmonella]

@@ExpiredCartonOfEggNogg Really? That's very disappointing. LOL

[@dane-c7g]

How much enjoyment from these videos is too much? :D

[@loungelizard836]

Very logical and we'll presented. Thank you! Should be required viewing for all leaders (politicians?)

[@ZIlberbot]

thanks for vivid diagrams and interesting explanations with good examples !

[@diablominero]

Linear no threshold be like: I'd die if I fell off a 100 foot cliff, so if 200 people step off a 6 inch curb, one of them will die too.

[@WhereWhatHuh]

Well, a small minute number of them might sprain their ankle and stumble in front of a bus, so there's that ... But yes, it gets to the "half a chicken lays half an egg in half a day" joke...

[@WhereWhatHuh]

@UCLxLMtTzKFe35Qh0RzM9E7A So as the full question goes, if half a chicken lays half an egg in half a day, how long does it take for a one-legged grasshopper to kick the seeds out of a dill pickle? alternatively, ... how many bagels does it take to shingle a doghouse? I would love to hear the answer.

[@mpetersen6]

@@WhereWhatHuh Well there are people who step off of curbs, fall and smack the sidewalk with the head and die. People die every year falling out of bed. At the other end are the occasional skydiver whose chute doesn't open and lives.

[@WhereWhatHuh]

@@mpetersen6 So at what point would we opine that their venturing outside of their homes caused their deaths (or substantially increased its risk)?

[@DanielsPolitics1]

A better model for accumulation of genetic mutations which might cause cancer is standing the other side of a very large field and someone fires a single shot in a random direction. Is this bullet going to hit me? Is this bit of radiation going to cause a mutation which creates a cancer? There does seem to be some evidence to suggest the existence of a threshold, but the idea that any further mutation might be the one that causes a cancer is not in any way inherently silly. In fact, theory would suggest it would be the case, and it is the experimental findings which are surprising, in so far as they suggest there might be a threshold.

[@PoulFrommPoland]

Much respect for the ability of writing like that, i couldn't do that.

[@onewhosaysgoose4831]

19:49 and 18:49 and 18:35 Show that his videos are actually just mirrored. These 3 timestamps let you compare the placement of his watch and the pin on his jackets' lapels. In the classroom footage he is not writing on a transparent surface, and so does not need to mirror it; you can see his watch on his left arm, the pin on his left lapel, and how he talks by waving his right hand around. Then go to the main body of the video where he writes with his "left" hand, but also is wearing his watch on his "right" arm, the pin on his "right" lapel, and waves around his "left" hand while talking.

[@andrewlavey6992]

Another excellent presentation, Prof.

[@alphanovember1234]

the fact he gives entire lectures writing backwards with no errors is impressive...

[@NL-tq1yr]

They flip the video

[@onewhosaysgoose4831]

19:49 and 18:49 and 18:35 Show that his videos are actually just mirrored. These 3 timestamps let you compare the placement of his watch and the pin on his jackets' lapels. In the classroom footage he is not writing on a transparent surface, and so does not need to mirror it; you can see his watch on his left arm, the pin on his left lapel, and how he talks by waving his right hand around. Then go to the main body of the video where he writes with his "left" hand, but also is wearing his watch on his "right" arm, the pin on his "right" lapel, and waves around his "left" hand while talking.

[@ZeekWolfe1]

Extremely interesting! Thanks for the posting.

[@larryroyovitz7829]

Why am I just finding this channel now?

[@robinwells8879]

Very clear and concise. Many thanks.

[@MrGigaHurtz]

Very informative. One thing, so many of these numbers are dependent on time.

[@justgivemethetruth]

Just brilliant! Thank you so much.

[@carltheshivan]

What were those radium girls thinking? I wouldn't put a paintbrush with paint on it in my mouth even once, let alone every few minutes throughout the work day, even if the paint WASN'T radioactive.

[@mpik1283]

Just remember. 3,6 rontgen is not great not terrible

[@henrik2117]

Great speak! but the sound of that marker gave something close to 500 Sievert per letter! 🙉

[@johnfarmer3506]

17:57 Like the way you address that our cells have learned to repair themselves based off of an evolutionary response to rad and other carcinogenetic material.

[@Andrew-ep4kw]

Excellent demonstration on radiation and its dangers (and lack of danger). Unfortunately, radiation is poorly understood in the US, and you fear what you don't know. This is not very different from the folks in Salem blaming things they couldn't understand on witches.

[@tomvice]

Thank you professor

[@Stadtpark90]

I love how good he writes mirrored right to left with his left hand... - I guess it is more likely they play the video mirrored though... (edit: I should have scrolled down the comments - of course someone said that before me...)

[@LFTRnow]

It wasn't mentioned here, but there is also a hypothesis called "radiation hormesis" which states a LITTLE radiation is good for you. Seems strange at first, until you consider that your body needs to recognize DNA damage that can become cancerous. If you rarely get this damage, the body isn't as ready to fight it, and so may more likely get cancer. There are various studies, including some from NIH which can be googled.

[@krzosu]

Very informative - Thank you.

[@PaulFisher]

In the time since you produced this excellent video, we have all unfortunately become much more familiar with the concept of “excess deaths”.

[@kadenwolf5798]

I love that little bit at the bottom on the 1 slide about cell phones. That's fucking hilarious!

[@kadenwolf5798]

"It's unfortunate, but everybody dies...."😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@borichmond4218]

112 Radium in Humans: A Review of U.S. Studies In the same publication, Rowland (in press) also examined dose-response functions for head carcinomas. As in previous studies, the linear, linear exponential, and dose-squared exponential functions all fitted the data satisfactorily. The reason lies in the scarcity of head carcinomas. With only 19 of these malignancies observed in the cohort examined, the data are insufficient to discriminate between alternate formulations. The records indicate that bone sarcomas occurred about twice as often as head carcinomas in the radium-exposed populations. The total known population had 85 bone sarcomas and 37 head carcinomas, while the total measured population had 64 bone sarcomas and 32 head carcinomas. Among the female dial workers, considered the best cohort for dose-response analyses, 46 bone sarcomas and 19 head carcinomas were observed. Because the number of head carcinomas is not sufficient to allow unequivocal determination of the best form for a dose-response function, the best predictor of their incidence at a given intake level is the predicted number of bone sarcomas at that level, divided by two. At the same international seminar in Heidelberg, Thomas (in press) presented work in which he used lognormal data analysis and the newly calculated skeletal dose values (presented in the appendix of this document) to reach the conclusion that a threshold exists for radium-induced malignancies. Thomas calculated threshold values of 390-620 cGy and suggested the adoption of a value of 1,000 cGy as the threshold for radium-induced malignancies in humans, the same value Evans (1974) had derived 20 years earlier.

[@beachcomber2008]

The Earth was much more radioactive when it formed. Life had to have had reasonable repair mechanisms capable of dealing with worse radiation then at present. Hence the threshold.

[@taraswertelecki7874]

The reason for that was the Solar System was close to a supernova, which injected A LOT of highly radioactive isotopes into it after the first solid matter coagulated out of the Solar nebula, but before the planets formed.

[@tonyduncan9852]

@@taraswertelecki7874 The way I would have put that is that the Solar System formed from the wreckage of several short-lived giant stars, which on their way to neutron stars and black holes had released _ALL possible atomic matter,_ some of which was radioactive, and immediately began to diminish. The more important point is that Life originated in far more radioactive conditions than the present, and radiation damage toleration was an intrinsic part of the way it came to be.

[@taraswertelecki7874]

Yes, it was highly radioactive in the beginning, because a supernova both irradiated the Solar System and put a lot of radioisotopes into it, such as Aluminum-26 and Iron-60. Subsequent supernova near the Earth have added more radioactive isotopes to the Earth.

[@weasle2904]

When land life formed and evolved our ozone layer was far less developed, biggest reason.

[@beachcomber2008]

@@weasle2904 Nope.

[@nelsonlandry5488]

i love this guy !

[@andrejmucic5003]

The Radium Girls suffered from phosy jaw caused by the phosphorus in the radium dye. This disease also afflicted workers in early match stick factories. That is why modern matches are called safety matches, not because they are safe for the user, but because they are safe for the worker making them. Marie Curie discovered and worked with Radium her entire life without any protection. She died age 80 something of anemia, which is a common cause of death for elderly women of that time. Her husband and lab mate Pierre Curie was un over by a tram and died from trauma.

[@Kzaar]

this is my 4th lecture in a row now

[@theflyingmylle]

Very interesting, thx for uploading

[@brandti1367]

7:17 Maximum dose for radiation workers is NOT uniform around the world. I don't know for other countries, but in Germany the limit is 20 mSv for Category A workers and 6 mSv for Category B workers.

[@Skinny-me]

Wonderfully explained! You are so good at teaching! Question: I got 73 Grey during my Throat cancer treatment. How does that compare in Sieverts? Thanks, David.

[@MarkRose1337]

A Gray is basically 1 Sievert absorbed by tissue. Alpha and neutron radiation are more biologically damaging than beta or gamma, plus it depends on where the radiation is absorbed. Note that the doses talked about in the video are whole body doses. Your whole body was not given 73 grays, but just the targeted area they were trying to kill/destroy. That being said, your whole body was dosed, but nowhere near to the same level (there's a reason why they will observe from behind leaded glass). I'm guessing the passed a rotating beam through the tumour to minimize the damage to the surrounding tissues?

[@Flinsch77]

Let's eat all the bananas!

[@tota0523]

Great video

[@rocknroll368]

How about radiation treatment for cancer?

[@TaRatTinCan]

Watching it in 2021 and found it fascinating that the professor decided to explain “excess deaths” like it was not a common term. Then I realized that in 2019 it probably wasn’t.

[@mpetersen6]

Like my doctor explained it to me. 1) There's always something going around (flu strains, rhinovirus' etc) 2) We live in a constant sea of viruses 3) These viruses are constantly mutating but most of the mutations are not viable

[@davidb.1218]

This guy is so easy to listen to.

[@WalkerKlondyke]

Well, since I’m already a motorcycle rider, maybe I should just go ahead and get a job cleaning up after nuclear disasters.

[@tonyduncan9852]

Road dirt has been everywhere, and contains everything.

[@CED99]

It would probably lower your death risk... Because you'd have less time to ride!

[@majordbag2]

Fun Fact: In hospitals, especially ER rooms, "Organ donor" is slang for a patient who rides motorcycles, e.g. if they bring in a guy into the E.R.who crashed his motorcycle in traffic they'll say "we got the organ donor from the crash on 5th and Broadway., which operating room?...OK number 4".

[@RevMikeBlack]

Gunners on the ground can't possibly see cockpit lights in a bomber flying at 30,000 feet. Airplane crews needed to maintain night vision at all times in order to see other planes, both friend and foe. Also, they needed to see their gauges which were barely lit, again to preserve night vision.

[@DJMVDP]

just great!

[@johns1625]

This guy can write backwards better than I can write forwards...

[@benb3500]

great video very interesting

[@richdobbs6595]

Denver is not at 1000 ft - it is the Mile High City after all, and it is not part of the Colorado Plateau. Most of Colorado is not on the Colorado Plateau (but large parts of Utah, Arizona, and New Mexico are!).

[@jeffhurckes190]

I'm suspecting his mentioning of the Colorado Plateau was a mix of both elevation and mineralogy, as much of the plateau has a higher than average uranium content. Agreed though about his mistake of the actual elevation of Denver.

[@MarkRose1337]

It's obvious he knows Denver is higher than 1000 feet. No doubt he meant to say 1 mile and misspoke. We all make mistakes and not all will be caught in editing.

[@rfvtgbzhn]

8:12 his actually shows that the health of workers is less worth than property/profits. Workers are allowed to get up to 10 Rem when "protecting valuable property". Using the formula at 13:54, this means an excess death rate of 0.02% per year which means that the chance of dying increases by 0.4% if you get this dose every year for 40 years. And even with normal limit of 5 Rem per year it increases by 0.2% in this case. Or maybe to put it in perpective: if there are 1 million workers who get the 10/5 Rem dose, 200/100 if them die in a year. If these rates of deaths where caused by accidents during work it would be deemed unacceptable in most "advanced" countries.

[@shockadinz9785]

you forget the part where he talks about threshold doses. It is hard to say at what point the threshold is but it appears based on what he is saying somewhere a bit under 10 Rem. Also there are 2 other things to take into account, the first being that these excess deaths aren't instantaneous because it may take years to develop cancer in the first place, and then with treatment many more years until death. The second thing you have to take into account is the fatality rate of other types of jobs. For instance delivery drivers in the United States have a fatality rate of 270 people per million per year, and those fatalities presumably happen faster than cancer.

[@rfvtgbzhn]

@@shockadinz9785 delivery drivers are a special case, because the US in general has many traffic deaths (from my understanding mainly because it is too easy to geg a driving license) and maybe also because they might get robbed or shot when going to the wrong house. It's easy for corporations to not clain responsibility for traffic accidents and murders, howevee I think that the fatality rate that is usually deemed acceptable in a factory or office is much lower. PS: Also theshold theory is nlt acceöted universally, while the guy in this video says thaz it is mlre likely correct than the linear theory I heared the opöosite by other experts. I heared lf a study about the connection between background radiation and cancer rates which seems to support the linear theory begause they found a difference when the radiation was only something line 0.2 Rem higher. They used a very high sample size.

[@shockadinz9785]

@@rfvtgbzhn If delivery drivers seem like a special case for you, the national statistic is 42.9 people per million die working any job within the United States, including office workers and the like. That's already getting close to the 200/100 figures you are giving. As far as the threshold theory being valid or notl i'm not informed enough to argue. I believe the other points I make are strong enough without needing the threshold theory anyways.

[@mercenaryex834]

Let me throw a question in the table sir. Let's say that we have 2 situations 1) i expose myself in 6 Sieverts but in time duration of 10 seconds. 2) i expose myself in 2 Sieverts but in time duration of 1 year. which state will have the most deadly effects?

[@ibmmtr]

1-Acute Radiation Sickness 2-Higher chance of Cancer with chronic radiation effects

[@WhereWhatHuh]

Ibrahem is correct. Also, 6 Sieverts in 10 seconds would be so severely acute a dose that it could be instantly fatal. A better comparison for acute versus long-term would be 6 Sieverts in a day. While radiation does not exactly have a physical impact per se, one might compare falling off of a cliff to rolling down a hill. The energy of impact is distributed for a longer period of time rolling down the hill, thus there is less damage over all compared to falling off of a cliff, even though the energy absorbed is the same. By analogy, the longer the period over which the dose is received, the lower the amount of immediate damage that is done.

[@ExplorewithSvetlin]

Is it dangerous to visit the Chernobyl exclusion zone in 2020 on a tour? Is inhaling an alpha emitter a real danger?

[@danadurnfordkevinblanchdebunk]

Nope, just don't live there for years.

[@hankcester]

Yes if it gets inside your body your cells will absorb 100 percent of the alpha radiation damaging your cells

[@robozstarrr8930]

Enjoyable lecture. curious, what the curve of the graph would appear ( & how "linear" it might look) if the dose exposed rate figures stay same but are compressed to say, a 30 day period instead of a year. on a side note, although Radium dial painting was done thru late '60's in US, most severe dangers to the women dial painter w/licking their brushes occurred during painting watch dials in WWI. Cheers

[@MarkRose1337]

Probably similar. Sun burns are radiation burns. A bit of sun is good, since we need it to make vitamin d out of cholesterol. But too much too quickly may cause more DNA damage than the body can repair, potentially leading to melanoma. I can have exposed skin all day in winter, but I'll burn in fifteen minutes around the summer solstice, because the dose rate is too high for me.

[@max010113]

the thumbnail looks like a minecraft chest inventory

[@Peter_Riis_DK]

I'd call the possibility of death a risc - not a chance... 🤨 Anyway, I planned to see only what this was, perhaps watch a few minutes or so - but it was so damn interesting and well presented that I watched the whole damn thing.

[@parkershaw8529]

I serious doubt people on the ground can see a dim flash light in the cockpit. Radium was used because its reliability and longevity.

[@moon-coder]

I thought exactly the same thing... but now that I think about it more: 1) when bombing, you are probably flying low, 2) even when people on the ground won't see you, they are still shooting and trying hard to see you, so perhaps pilots did not want to rely on "they won't likely notice my light"

[@spacy7test812]

Nice video

[@loungelizard836]

Dental X-rays back then (early 1900s) were at a much higher dose because the film wasn't nearly as sensitive.

[@peterphil9686]

Very good

[@johnfarmer3506]

8:21 I don't think there is limit on life saving but it has to be voluntary after a potential dose of 25 rem/250mSv

[@tomvice]

We're so primitive yet so advanced. It's a wonderful era to live in humanity

[@videosuperhighway7655]

Back in the days they sold Radium water as a health tonic. A famous golfer drank these bottles and eventually his jaw fell off and then died later. The reason is Radium atoms are captured by bone matter.

[@zapfanzapfan]

A 3 year round trip to Mars is expected to get you on the order of 1 Sv in total. Shouldn't be a problem compared to the other risks involved :-)

[@MarkRose1337]

That's why most interplanetary ship designs store the water as a jacket around the ship, with other supplies as another layer. The first interplanetary voyagers aren't going to get an expansive Ten Forward view, sadly.

[@zapfanzapfan]

Yes, the water will stop the particles from the Sun anyway. The galactic cosmic rays they will just have to live with.

[@royk7712]

bone and muscle loss in zero acceleration is worst effect when traveling to mars. after year of travel suddenly goes into gravity well, its not going very well, scott kelly need help even when going outside the capsule after year experiment in ISS.

[@zapfanzapfan]

@@royk7712 Yes, a rotating space craft to get at least some gravity would be good.

[@royk7712]

@@zapfanzapfan it would be huge, maybe the radius would be 30-40 meter @3RPM produce 0.3g at least so the crew would get confused from artificial gravity gradient from a different height. it would be a huge spacecraft and need to be assembled in space

[@diablominero]

We still use radioactive stuff to make things permanently glow. But we use tritium instead of radium now.

[@thunderdrumandbass]

thank you radiation man

[@valkyrie9553]

I need a dosimeter next time I go to fruit shopping! 🤣🤣🤣 Also I live at a mile high level 1,645 meters above sea level on Highveld of South Africa

[@martingoodman3300]

At a very first approximation, I find this lecture to be a valuable conveying of accurate information regarding how basically harmless radiation is to humans. Especially valuable is its dealing, in its second half, with fact that the LNT hypothesis is wrong. Kudos to the lecturer for that. Bravo! However, this is a flawed presentation. The lecturer constantly presents radiation doses in Sieverts, and lauds a chart that does the same. This is odd, for tho he does make a somewhat cogent attack on the linear (at low to medium doses) notion of radiation having ill effects on humans, he seems to be ignorant of the fact the the very unit, Sievert, was CONSTRUCTED using assumptions from the LNT approach to estimating harm radiation can do to humans! Sieverts are supposed to specifically measure the impact of radiation on life... humans in particular. The unit is created by taking an objective physical measurement of radiation ... Grays... and multiplying that by a FUDGE FACTOR to get from that the biological harm given types of radiation, energies of radiation, types of exposures to radiation, etc. can cause. But these "fudge factors" are in part derived FROM the entirely false LNT hypothesis! Thus they overestimate harm by factors of 10 to 100 or even 100. This issue comes up in another form: The lecturer fails to quantitate by HOW MUCH the LNT estimates of harm from radiation are off. In fact, they are off by 10 to 100 fold, and at times by as much as 1000 fold. He fails to address another aspect of the falsehood of the LNT hypothesis... the claim that repeated low doses of radiation cumulatively increase one's risk of cancer. This simply is not so... below the high threshold limits you can be exposed 300 times a year and still have zero risk, if the exposures are a day apart. This due to another fact the lecturer does not bring up... the specific biological repair mechanisms that fix DNA that CAN in fact be damaged by a single particle of radiation, but DOES NOT SAY DAMAGED. He could have been more clear in presenting the data from the study of the Radium Girls. He could have made clear that people by the thousands continued to paint radium paint on dials for 50 years after it was discovered that licking the brushes was a bad thing. That when proper safeguards were introduced, when the dose of radiation fell below a very high threshold, there was NO increases WhAT SO EVER in the cancer rates of radium painters of dials, who were studied by the Argonne National Laboratory, with one or two thousand followed for MANY DECADES, medically. But he didn't. He was very vague about data on the radium girls. Unlike Wade Allison, who is extremely detailed and precise in his presentation of this information in his book "Nuclear is for Life" He could have mentioned the study of generations of people living against a natural background radiation of 300 milli Sieverts, in Ramsar, Iran... of which 200 millisieverts is radon gas breathed INTO THEIR LUNGS. He could have referred to the finding NO increase in cancer in that population, including of lung cancer, when it was studied and compared to a well matched control group of nearby towns of people of the same culture, diet, and genetic background. He didn't... perhaps because this gives the lie to his false assertion that 100 millisieverts per year of radiation can cause risk of cancer. IT DOES NOT. So, while I applaud in general this effort to educate people about how relatively harmless radiation is, I would raise the criticism that it is a bit muddled at times, and does not go nearly far enough. Note I am an MD,. trained in the sciences, who has spent a lot of time studying the biological effects of radiation.

[@aussietaipan8700]

It would be interesting to see data on people who eat banana's on a daily basis like me and other foods that contain higher levels of radiation and those who live at elevated areas or have a busy air commute build some for of radiation immunity?

[@WhereWhatHuh]

Based on the extremely low levels of banana radiation and radiation due to elevation, the numbers would be so low that it would be difficult to build a test group. As he said, we do not see significantly different cancer rates in Denver compared to, say, Los Angeles or Melbourne. For a study to show a scientifically significant result, there would need to be about a 5% higher rate (or more) of cancer or similar indication of radiation exposure.

[@BiosWars]

What radiation level would or could cause respiratory issues or failure?.

[@trucid2]

Any evidence of hormesis for low doses of radiation?

[@jonathanedelson6733]

I don't believe it is fair to say that the data shows that the threshold hypothesis is true. It is more fair to say that the existing data is consistent with both the linear hypothesis and the threshold hypothesis, as well as the radiation hormesis hypothesis. There is suggestive/developing data refuting the linear hypothesis, but I don't think we are actually there yet. -Jon

[@JohnTrustworthy]

That depends: Microsievert? No. Kilosievert: Yes.

[@BrettonFerguson]

You don't need Kilosieverts, just sieverts will do it. Hisashi Ouchi received 17 Sieverts, he lived 83 days. Well some of him lived 83 days, most of him died sooner.

[@BrettonFerguson]

"One sievert (100 rem), will cause illness if absorbed all at once, and 8 sieverts will result in death, even with treatment" -PBS.org. Hisashi Ouchi received 17 sieverts, 1.7 kilorem.

[@taraswertelecki7874]

If you approach a neutron star that is also a magnetar, you'll be exposed to a lot more to kilo Sieverts of radiation......four or more Sieverts is fatal.

[@ttdsi5745]

When stuff starts to catch fire

[@Dave5843-d9m]

People in Ramsar Iran (and some other parts of the world) have high background radiation due to the rock formations in the area. In Ramsar, the dose from background radiation is up to 260 mSv y−1. That’s 13 times higher than the 20 mSv y−1 permitted for radiation workers. Yet the people have no radiation injury and seem to have fewer cancers than the general non irradiated population. This being so why are occupational exposure levels set so low?

[@fowlerpower95]

avoid getting sued