#radiation safety

[ebonyheartnet]

So, uh, has anyone else been tuned into the yellow cake uranium paint bullshit?

Apparently there’s fucking copycats on Reddit 🫠

For those who have no clue but want the run down:

Disclaimer: nothing I state here is intended to be defamatory. My perspective is that of a third party civilian. Any bias towards action is informed by professional interactions with regulatory bodies uninvolved in the following chain of events.

A Utah woman known for making paints with dangerous materials bought yellow cake uranium—a water soluble form of the radioactive heavy metal—and ground it up even finer to make paint. This video was posted to a large following across multiple platforms.

Concerned civilians on TikTok asked a radiation safety specialist w/ almost 20 years in rad work if this was ill advised.

Said safety specialist promptly stated that the concern was warranted, and that for the first time ever, they had to file a report with the NRC (<- federal regulatory body in charge of things like “who should be touching radioactive source material?”)

The painter replied that the safety specialist shouldn’t worry so much, as she’s actively using PPE.

The whistleblower proceeded to lay into her about said PPE (inappropriate protective factor, incorrect filters, likely incorrect fit, etc.), almost guaranteed lack of access to the appropriate waste streams, etc.

This included information on the negative health effects anyone exposed may experience, as well as the potentially millions of dollars in man hours and clean up that the painter may be on the hook for.

The whistleblower also strongly advised her to self report to the NRC to hopefully avoid any potential criminal charges.

The NRC allegedly got back to the radiation safety worker within 24 hours. To paraphrase, “Thank you so much. She’s in Utah, which is a cooperative state. They’ll continue looking into this.”

The painter continued to double down, with support from hobbyists (collectors of radioactive items like radium clocks). All concerns about incorrect PPE and exposure risk for nearby civilians continued to be ignored.

Other people actually in the industry continued to chime in that yes, it was that serious.

A handful of points repeated by fellow industry professionals was that uranium, like radium, likes to replace bone. Even if the amount radiation’s not the most deadly, it’s still a water soluble heavy metal. There was also a risk of copy cats.

While the hobbyists continued to dog pile, the whistleblower allegedly received a very unexpected follow up email from Utah’s regulatory body.

To paraphrase, “At your request, you are allowed to tell your audience that yellow cake uranium is considered radioactive source material. While this was purchased out of state, you must be licensed to own and handle it in Utah. The painter has to take down everything related to the uranium paint while we continue looking into this.”

Simultaneously, reddit happens. Forums disparaging the whistleblower and backing the painter are flourishing at this point.

Eventually, at least one forum of civilians defending the painter started making moves to buy yellow cake uranium. The whistleblower got word of this and encouraged folks to file their own NRC reports to nip this in the bud.

The painter, who had been quiet for some time, then began making legal threats. She attempted to intimidate the whistleblower into taking everything down and issuing a public apology.

The whistleblower posted the screenshots of said legal threats and doubled down. Additional statements were made that they do not make any money off of this on social media, as that would be a conflict of interest. This was solely brought up in the name of public safety.

As of 03/18/25, the initial whistleblower continues to state that their concern is warranted. Due to the actions taken by the painter, they believe she is either an untrained, unlicensed civilian or someone operating outside of the scope of their license. Either way, their stance has not changed: no regulatory body would respond that quickly to an unfounded request for oversight.

[argonmasters]

I need to yap about Iron Lung and Simon getting fatal radiation dose.

Babbling under the cut.

Okay with the caveat that I haven't seen the movie, let's talk about this:

Someone on set did research. These numbers are BANANA PANTS.

So that's 740R a shot and they call out 600R as acute radiation poisoning. That's pretty accurate. 500-600R is chemotherapy dose and generally chemotherapy radiation is aimed in a very precise manner. This is a whole body acute blast.

Given the total lack of GAF in submarine design i think this is a very intense industrial radiography camera. They exist right now in the world but 740R at a foot is, well. It's hard to give a dose for current radiography sources because they're measured in Curies and that doesn't directly convert to dose.

ANYWAY.

The thing about radiation is it isn't directional. Not a physical source anyway. Radiation generally has spherical output. It's going in all directions and this is something you have to account for. Highly calibrated medical sources are different of course. This isn't that.

Simon is getting absolutely blasted every camera shot. He has radiation dermatitis, aka erythema. And it's fast onset, too. That's really, really bad.

So a thing about radiation poisoning is a thing called latency time. There's an initial reaction, a period of fake wellness then the real symptoms hit hard and fast. The higher the dose the less that latency is. The fact that he has such short latency on the erythema means his exposure was intense.

He was dead in two camera shots. Realistically. His body just hadn't realized it yet. Latency. And radiation is accumulative, so every single shot compounded. Fast.

He was never coming back. And he might have killed everyone he flashed with the camera too.

[haintxblue]

Tried to post this in response to the existing post about this by @ebonyheartnet but they hid the note and blocked me. Still think it's kinda lame for the misinformation to be out there and for the notes to make it look like no one disagrees (even tho people clearly are if you dig via Google search) but since they're doubling down in this way, I will do my best to get this into the tags the other one was under and see if that does anything. Please check the YouTubers pinned comments for some slight corrections (video is still correct it's just some language things).

Don't hide notes that fact check you. That's so lame.

[thechurchoftheatom]

A Sermon for January 15th: A Reading on Preparedness

Brothers and Sisters in the Atom, today’s message begins with an acknowledgment of the practical. While we, as members of the Church of the Atom, contemplate the vast and long-reaching implications of nuclear energy and waste—our legacy for countless generations—it’s important to remember that most of the challenges we face in life are far more immediate. Disasters may not always arrive in the form of a nuclear apocalypse, but they can still strike without warning, leaving us vulnerable. Floods, fires, hurricanes, power outages, car breakdowns, and even a sudden injury can upend our lives in an instant.

Preparedness is not just a lofty or distant ideal; it is a practical, day-to-day expression of care. It is how we honor our responsibility to ourselves, our loved ones, and our communities. In this spirit, we turn to a reading from Ready.gov, a resource that provides essential knowledge for safeguarding against the unexpected.

A Reading from Ready.gov: Preparedness Basics

"Disasters can strike without warning, disrupting lives, displacing families, and leaving communities in turmoil. By taking small steps now, you can ensure safety and security for yourself and your loved ones in the future."

Emergency Kits: The Foundation of Preparedness

An emergency kit is more than just a box of supplies; it is your lifeline when normal systems fail. A good kit should last at least three days and include:

Water: One gallon per person per day for drinking and sanitation.

Food: Non-perishable items such as canned goods, energy bars, and dry foods, along with a manual can opener.

Tools and Lighting: A flashlight with extra batteries, multipurpose tools, and a crank-powered or battery-operated radio.

First Aid Kit: Bandages, antiseptic, necessary medications, and any required medical devices.

Hygiene Supplies: Soap, hand sanitizer, moist towelettes, and other sanitation items.

Clothing and Warmth: Sturdy shoes, extra clothing, and blankets or sleeping bags.

Important Documents: Copies of IDs, insurance policies, and bank information in a waterproof container.

Cash and Coins: Small denominations for situations where electronic payments are unavailable.

Special Items: Supplies for children, elderly family members, and pets, including formula, diapers, and pet food.

Developing a Plan

Preparedness is more than a kit—it’s a mindset. Develop a plan to ensure everyone in your household knows what to do in an emergency. Establish an out-of-town contact for communication and choose a meeting place for reunification. Practice drills to make the plan second nature.

Everyday Uses for Preparedness

Emergencies don’t always come with fanfare. A flat tire in the middle of nowhere, a power outage during a storm, or even an unexpected illness can test our ability to respond. A well-stocked emergency kit and a thought-out plan make these everyday disasters manageable. Being prepared isn’t just for the unthinkable—it’s for the inevitable.

Reflection on Preparedness

Brothers and Sisters, the Church of the Atom teaches us to look both to the infinite and the immediate. While we are committed to the long-term legacy of nuclear semiotics—ensuring that future generations heed the warnings of our age—we must not neglect the more mundane yet equally important task of ensuring our present safety.

Preparedness is practical, yes, but it is also a sacred duty. When we prepare, we acknowledge that the future matters, that life is precious, and that we are responsible not just for ourselves but for those who depend on us. By preparing, we reflect the values of stewardship, foresight, and care that lie at the heart of our faith.

Think of your emergency kit as an act of love—love for yourself, for your family, and for your community. When you build it, you are not just collecting supplies; you are making a promise to those around you that their safety is your priority.

But preparedness is not a solitary endeavor. Share this knowledge with your neighbors, friends, and family. Strengthen your community’s resilience by encouraging others to create their own kits and plans. Consider joining or supporting a local Community Emergency Response Team (CERT). You can find more information and opportunities to get involved at Ready.gov.

A Warning from the Atom

While our message today emphasizes everyday preparedness, let us not forget the unique guidance of our faith: to avoid the places where the atom’s power has left a dangerous legacy. Nuclear waste storage facilities, marked with the unmistakable trefoil, are not places of curiosity or exploration. They are warnings in themselves—symbols of danger that transcend language and culture. As stewards of this knowledge, we must ensure these places are avoided, respected, and understood as hazardous for generations to come.

Closing Words

As you go forth this week, I urge you to take this sermon to heart. Build your emergency kit if you haven’t already. Update your family’s communication plan. Take practical steps toward readiness not out of fear but out of love and responsibility.

Remember, preparedness is not just for the end of the world—it is for every day. By acting now, you protect the lives and futures of those you hold dear.

And as always, may the energy of the atom guide us—toward safety, toward wisdom, and toward a future of hope and preparedness.

[nucl-eon]

April 26, 1986

[duchessofvastergotland]

2nd March 2020 // The Crown Princess met with representatives from the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority, a governmental body specialising in radiation protection preparedness, who updated her on the situation following the 2011 disaster at Japan’s Fukushima nuclear plant

[drferox]

X-Ray Safety

Anonymous said: The clinic I work at as a tech is very small and a local business. Everyone there is lovely, BUT, I have expressed my concerns about safety with them and nothing has been done. We are not provided with lead gloves or goggles for xrays. They tell me that they arent that important, but I really would rather be safe than get cancer. I haven't been able to find much information online for how important those parts are, I was wondering if you have any input on it?

A workplace, of any sort, really should be providing suitable safety equipment. In a vet clinic with an Xray (or any other radiation device) that includes all the usual lead getup, and (in Australia at least) an X-ray monitoring badge, which you should wear at work at all times to record your personal exposure.

I honestly have never seen lead goggles used in veterinary practice, neither working as a vet nor visiting clinics as a student, nor at the university. But lead gloves or hand shields should definitely be available! Sometimes you don’t even need your hands inside them to restrain a small patient.

Xray beams get rapidly weaker with distance and follows an inverse square law. If you double the distance (x2), you have divided the strength of the beam by a factor of 4 (2^2). If you triple the distance (x3) you have reduced the strength of the beam to 1/9 of what it was (3^2). Distance is very much your friend.

You can also check the integrity of your lead gowns yourself by Xraying them when they are lying over the top of your left-right marker. Use a low setting, such as you would use for a cat abdomen, and see if you can still read the marker underneath the lead. If yes, you need a new one.

You may also discover cracks in the lead in this way, or so-called ‘vampire marks’ caused by some bright spark frequently fastening the clip of a pen onto the gown.

You can also calibrate your Xray beam, which you should do on occasion anyway, to ensure the radiation is only being aimed where the light is going, and nowhere else.

To do this, you center a square or rectangle of Xray beam in the middle of yoru film, and place paperclips around the perimeter of the light. You want them to all be exactly on the edge of the light beam, so you can see how closely the Xray beam matches to the light. It should be very, very close, because you have no other way to actually see the invisible Xray beam.

You can, in the short term, place a spare lead gown over your arm if it’s near the Xray beam, but having gloves or hand shields is definitely preferable if you’re going to be anywhere near that beam. Xray safety should be taken seriously, and reasonable steps to minimize exposure are important.

[rjzimmerman]

EPA Says Higher Radiation Levels Pose ‘No Harmful Health Effect’

In the event of a dirty bomb or a nuclear meltdown, emergency responders can safely tolerate radiation levels equivalent to thousands of chest X-rays, the Environmental Protection Agency said in new guidelines that ease off on established safety levels.

Excerpt:

In the event of a dirty bomb or a nuclear meltdown, emergency responders can safely tolerate radiation levels equivalent to thousands of chest X-rays, the Environmental Protection Agency said in new guidelines that ease off on established safety levels.

The EPA’s determination sets a level ten times the drinking water standard for radiation recommended under President Barack Obama. It could lead to the administration of President Donald Trump weakening radiation safety levels, watchdog groups critical of the move say.

"It’s really a huge amount of radiation they are saying is safe," said Daniel Hirsch, the retired director of the University of California, Santa Cruz’s program on environmental and nuclear policy. "The position taken could readily unravel all radiation protection rules."

The change was included as part of EPA "guidance" on messaging and communications in the event of a nuclear power plant meltdown or dirty bomb attack. The FAQ document, dated September 2017, is part of a broader planning document for nuclear emergencies, and does not carry the weight of federal standards or law.

Even with those lower standards, the EPA had never before said that any level of radiation exposure is safe, according to Jeff Ruch, executive director of the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, a watchdog group of government workers and retirees. Ruch linked the EPA’s scientific views on radiation exposure to the skepticism of EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt that humans are the main contributor to climate change.

“I knew that under Scott Pruitt EPA is in climate denial but now it appears to be in radiation denial, as well,” Ruch said. “This appears to be another case of the Pruitt EPA proclaiming conclusions exactly opposite the overwhelming weight of scientific research.”