Technology3 mins ago
Mammogram Radiation
17 Answers
I had a mammogram Tuesday and chest X-ray Wednesday. Would that amount of radiation be harmful?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by smurfchops. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.I haven't a clue but this site is very helpful.
"It does not make any difference whether you have a number of X-rays in one day or spread over many years, the total risk is just the same."
There is also a chart half way down which explains the risks of different types of x-rays. Also, the older you are the safer x-rays are.
https:/ /www.jp aget.nh s.uk/me dia/186 430/62- X-ray.p df
I wouldn't be worried, I'm sure I've had two chest x-rays on the same day.
"It does not make any difference whether you have a number of X-rays in one day or spread over many years, the total risk is just the same."
There is also a chart half way down which explains the risks of different types of x-rays. Also, the older you are the safer x-rays are.
https:/
I wouldn't be worried, I'm sure I've had two chest x-rays on the same day.
I also have had several x-rays in the same day. No apparent harm was experienced. The only harm I experienced in hospital through excess was contrast dye. Having used contrast dye on one day to position stents when fitted I was given another large dose the next day with a scan to ensure they hadn’t moved. I ended up visiting the nephrology clinic for the next 2 years with acute kidney damage. Still got a pulse though :-)
out by a thousand - oops!
0.1 mSievert is one tenth of a thousand
so 1 is ten thou millisievert
so 40 gy is four hundred thousand mSiev = 4 m CXR
oh, a gray is a sievert - one is energy emitted
the other is how much HEAT is absorbed
and the heat absorbed may not be a fair rep of the damage as the wavelength has an effect
someone asked
0.1 mSievert is one tenth of a thousand
so 1 is ten thou millisievert
so 40 gy is four hundred thousand mSiev = 4 m CXR
oh, a gray is a sievert - one is energy emitted
the other is how much HEAT is absorbed
and the heat absorbed may not be a fair rep of the damage as the wavelength has an effect
someone asked
my dentist (and nurses) still leave the room
yeah that is just girlie stuff - "just to be sure" wuthout evidence. A bit like the nitrous oxide spat a few months ago
in fact the magic figure is 6 ft or 2 m. - beyond two metres, the inverse square law means that just about every that goes boo in the night ( from a point source) is now close to zero
MRI scan the 2000 gauss line ( surface of course) is - - - 2m
yeah that is just girlie stuff - "just to be sure" wuthout evidence. A bit like the nitrous oxide spat a few months ago
in fact the magic figure is 6 ft or 2 m. - beyond two metres, the inverse square law means that just about every that goes boo in the night ( from a point source) is now close to zero
MRI scan the 2000 gauss line ( surface of course) is - - - 2m
///"just to be sure" wuthout evidence.///
makes sense to me. They could just wait till someone says "The evidence has now come in, and you're doomed". I remember people insisting they intended to go on smoking till it was proved to be bad for them. I'm not sure all of them survived till the evidence came in, but the ones who stopped "just to be sure" got it right.
makes sense to me. They could just wait till someone says "The evidence has now come in, and you're doomed". I remember people insisting they intended to go on smoking till it was proved to be bad for them. I'm not sure all of them survived till the evidence came in, but the ones who stopped "just to be sure" got it right.