Want this question answered?
Nuclear radiation can cause genetic mutations in our DNA, which can cause cancers. If the genetic mutations occur in the germ cells, then our gametes (sperm and egg cells) could have genetic mutations that could be passed on to our offspring. Also, if radiation levels are high enough, people can get radiation sickness, which can be fatal.
It is very unlikely for infrared radiation to have a dangerous effect on people. Normally, it will just make a person feel warmer. High levels can lead to burns and very rarely, cataracts in the eyes.
Yes, but there seems to be a misunderstanding here.Radiation is the emanation that comes from radioactive material. Take that radioactive material away, and the radiation goes away. With the exception of neutron radiation, which is not ionizing radiation, once that radiation goes away, there is no radioactivity left in the object that received the radiation.So, what we are really talking about is radioactive material which produces ionizing radiation, such as Cesium-137, Iodine-131, Cobalt-60, etc.In the medical arena, you can receive ionizing radiation from sources that are inside or outside the body. For instance, in cancer treatment, you might receive a dose of gamma radiation from Cobalt-60. This can either be done with a machine that holds and collimates the gamma radiation, or you could have Cobalt-60 pins surgically implanted into a tumor for localized longer term treatment. You could receive X-Rays. You could receive a small dose from a bone scan or a heart scan.In the non medical field, and I'm talking about nuclear accidents such as Fukushima Daiichi, the same principles apply. There is direct radiation from sources outside the body, but that is a very localized situation, applicable directly within the facility. Certainly, there is fuel damage, and parts of the facility are highly radioactive, preventing access for repairs. Externally, from the public's perspective, this has little impact.However, there is some leakage of low level mixed fission byproducts, such as Cesium-137, Strontium-90, and Iodine-131, and they are getting into the water and air, and contaminating (at a low level) things such as vegetables and milk. The problem is not so much the direct radiation from these sources, but the unknown hazard due to ingestion of them. The problem is that even low levels of these sources, when lodged in the body, can (and I emphasize can, not will) have impact to sensitive body tissues. (It depends on magnitude.) The issue is that we don't really know what the long term effects of low levels of radioactivity does to people. Certainly, we know what high levels do, to a great degree of certainty, but not so for low levels.So, the guiding principle to to be As Low As Reasonably Achievable, otherwise known as the ALARA principle. Yes, Fukushima Daiichi exceeded limits for release of radioactive materials, but we are not talking about a monstrous level here.I realize that this answer deviated quite a bit from the intent, on the surface, of the original question, but I was reading into the implied subtext, because it seems that Fukushima Daiichi is on everyone's mind these days. We need to maintain calm, and not listen to the hype.
Yes, but there seems to be a misunderstanding here.Radiation is the emanation that comes from radioactive material. Take that radioactive material away, and the radiation goes away. With the exception of neutron radiation, which is not ionizing radiation, once that radiation goes away, there is no radioactivity left in the object that received the radiation.So, what we are really talking about is radioactive material which produces ionizing radiation, such as Cesium-137, Iodine-131, Cobalt-60, etc.In the medical arena, you can receive ionizing radiation from sources that are inside or outside the body. For instance, in cancer treatment, you might receive a dose of gamma radiation from Cobalt-60. This can either be done with a machine that holds and collimates the gamma radiation, or you could have Cobalt-60 pins surgically implanted into a tumor for localized longer term treatment. You could receive X-Rays. You could receive a small dose from a bone scan or a heart scan.In the non medical field, and I'm talking about nuclear accidents such as Fukushima Daiichi, the same principles apply. There is direct radiation from sources outside the body, but that is a very localized situation, applicable directly within the facility. Certainly, there is fuel damage, and parts of the facility are highly radioactive, preventing access for repairs. Externally, from the public's perspective, this has little impact.However, there is some leakage of low level mixed fission byproducts, such as Cesium-137, Strontium-90, and Iodine-131, and they are getting into the water and air, and contaminating (at a low level) things such as vegetables and milk. The problem is not so much the direct radiation from these sources, but the unknown hazard due to ingestion of them. The problem is that even low levels of these sources, when lodged in the body, can (and I emphasize can, not will) have impact to sensitive body tissues. (It depends on magnitude.) The issue is that we don't really know what the long term effects of low levels of radioactivity does to people. Certainly, we know what high levels do, to a great degree of certainty, but not so for low levels.So, the guiding principle to to be As Low As Reasonably Achievable, otherwise known as the ALARA principle. Yes, Fukushima Daiichi exceeded limits for release of radioactive materials, but we are not talking about a monstrous level here.I realize that this answer deviated quite a bit from the intent, on the surface, of the original question, but I was reading into the implied subtext, because it seems that Fukushima Daiichi is on everyone's mind these days. We need to maintain calm, and not listen to the hype.
Radiation will stay in the Chernobyl area for the next 48,000 years but humans may begin repopulating the area in the next 600 years or so. The experts predict that by than the most dangerous levels of radiation will have disappeared or been sufficiently diluted into the air, soil, and water.
At present, Australia is said to receive high levels of ultraviolet radiation.
300092
The answer depends on where on earth you were. Near the tropics you will receive much more solar radiation (light) that if you were near the poles. Even if you think of ionising radiation the answer will depend on your location. According to the local council, more than 1% of houses in Cornwall (South West England), are subject to radon-based radiation levels of at least 200 Becquerels per cubic metre. This is primarily from granite in the bedrock - underneath the houses. This level is 10 times the average for the country.
The radiation levels for standard microwave ovens is 5 milliwatts. This includes the Haier MWM0701TW.
Yes
repeated exposures to both high-energy radiation and high levels of fallout exposure to high levels of fallout a single exposure to high-energy radiation
radiation levels.
Depens on radiation levels
Yes
- exposure to high levels of fallout - single exposure to high energy radiation - repeated exposures to both high energy radiation and high levels of fallout
repeated exposures to both high-energy radiation and high levels of fallout a single exposure to high-energy radiation exposure to high levels of fallout
exposure to high levels of fallout a single exposure to high-energy radiation repeated exposures to both high energy radiation and high levels of fallout