Online:
Visits:
Stories:

By Nuke Pro
Contributor profile | More stories

Story Views
Now:
Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:
Total:

Paid Nuclear Cartel Troll Tries to Discredit By Making an Argument on Dose that No One In Their Right Mind Would Make

Sunday, June 7, 2015 14:21

% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

(Before It's News)

NUKE PRO: Exposing Truth
Anti-Nuclear Information and Resources, and Disaster Preparation Planning: http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/

I had a pro nuke troll capping every comment I made, and then he tried to “prove” to me that his 30 years experience meant I shouldnt even question him, but then he took a firm stand that a mSV was not a rating of “dose” and that dose was only the energy emitted in a given volume or mass.
He obviously knows NOTHING about radiation. But claims 30 years in health physics, etc. What a joke, what an idiot.

ENTER THE TROLL

Atoms4Peace1 Nuke Pro • 2 hours ago

I beat you on this one nuke faux. You think Sv applies to chickens. Last I checked a chicken is not a man. Ill make an exception in your case. Dose is energy per unit. The rad is joules/kg. You can do the units. 1 Gray = 100 rad. 1 rem = 1 rad× rad weighting. 100 rem = 1 Sv. Capish?

Nuke Pro Atoms4Peace1 • 2 hours ago

Maybe we should see what the NRC says about dose limits….
I see 5000 mrem/yr for whole body. hmmmm, wait but you say mrem and Sv are the same unit, just the archaic Inch-Pound (British) versus the newer SI units (Systema International commonly called the metric system)
So indeed, the NRC set dose limits in Sieverts.
http://www.nrc.gov/images/abou…
I am amazed you are arguing this point.

Atoms4Peace1 Nuke Pro • an hour ago

To be accurate I said 100 rem is the same as 1 Sv. Both units of “dose equivalent”. Some also use the Sv for effective dose equivalent or H*10. But that's beyond your grasp.

Nuke Pro
You know I am making an article about this “argument”.

hilarious, know you back peddle and say ” some use the Sv”, lol, “some” like the NRC specifically using Sv and specifically calling it dose.

I wonder if any other organization calls Sv “dose”

Wait, looky here, Rod Adams using dose and Sv without any qualifications on how it is used…..and rolls in Whoremesis too

No one is absolutely sure what will happen to any particular individual
who is exposed to a dose rate of 2 – 5 Rem (20 – 50 mSv) per year for a
lifetime, but there is a growing body of peer-reviewed science studying
large, exposed populations against control populations that shows that
such a dose is statistically, at worst, harmless and, at best, a modest
health boost that stimulates adaptive responses.

http://atomicinsights.com/fission-advocates-should-cooperate-to-dispel-misinformation-about-radiation-health-effects/

Anyone else say that Sv is dose?

hmmm seems like the Health Physics Society is fine using Sv as dose with additional qualification

Annual Radiation Dose Limits
Agency

Radiation Worker – 50 mSv
(NRC, “occupationally” exposed)

http://hps.org/publicinformation/ate/faqs/regdoselimits.html

I see, it is not just the NRC that uses Sv (or mSv if you wish) as dose. HPS and your hero Rod Adams also use Sv as dose.
————————————————————————–

Source: http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/2015/06/paid-nuclear-cartel-troll-tries-to.html