Printer Friendly
The Free Library
14,560,361 articles and books
Member login
User name  
Password 
 
Join us Forgot password?

Radiation vs. radioactivity. (Letters From Our Readers).


"Glowing in the Dark" by Joni Praded (Your Health, May/ June 2002) is an excellent article, but it made one editorial error: confusing radiation with radioactivity radioactivity, spontaneous disintegration or decay of the nucleus of an atom by emission of particles, usually accompanied by electromagnetic radiation. The energy produced by radioactivity has important military and industrial applications. .

Radiation is a combination of particles and light given off by radioactive materials radioactive material Radiation A substance that contains unstable–radioactive–atoms that give off radiation as they decay. See Radioactive decay.  as they decay. The radioactive particles in your body are like little light bulbs that, instead of emitting e·mit  
tr.v. e·mit·ted, e·mit·ting, e·mits
1. To give or send out (matter or energy): isotopes that emit radioactive particles; a stove emitting heat.

2.
a.
 light, constantly send radiation into your body, causing cell damage. Therefore, the following sentence is incorrect: "Over the next few years, they will give researchers the rare chance to measure how radiation levels in children's bodies affect their health in later life." Should be "... how levels of radioactivity in children's bodies..."

Since such seemingly minor errors are seized upon by nuclear advocates, it behooves environmental journalists to watch out for avoidable mistakes.

Kevin Eber, Editor, EREN EREN Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Network (US Department of Energy)  Network News, via e-mail

We welcome your letters

Please type fetters fet·ter  
n.
1. A chain or shackle for the ankles or feet.

2. Something that serves to restrict; a restraint.

tr.v. fet·tered, fet·ter·ing, fet·ters
1. To put fetters on; shackle.
 and include your full name, address and a daytime phone number. Mail to: E Magazine/Advice and Dissent, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881, or e-mail: letters@emagazine.com.
COPYRIGHT 2002 Earth Action Network, Inc.
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2002, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

 Reader Opinion

Title:

Comment:



 

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Eber, Kevin
Publication:E
Date:Nov 1, 2002
Words:174
Previous Article:A mercurial debate. (Letters From Our Readers).
Next Article:Poisoning frogs: are people next?



Related Articles
Get a HALF-LIFE.(Brief Article)
Maine Gets Tough on Power Plant Closing.(Brief Article)
Collision of Evidence and Assumptions: TMI Deja View.
BOXER PROTESTS SOIL TRANSPORT.(News)
NUKE WASTE DUMPED RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL GOING TO CALABASAS, SUNSHINE CANYON LANDFILLS.(News)
DUMPING OF WASTE IS QUESTIONED.(News)
THE STARS COME OUT CELEBRITIES BACK BAN ON NUKE WASTE.(News)
ALARCON DUMPS EXPANSION OF BRADLEY INTO HAHN'S LAP.(News)
Environmental Health Science: Recognition, Evaluation, and Control of Chemical and Physical Health Hazards.
Prometheus Books.(Brief Article)

Terms of use | Copyright © 2009 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters | Submit articles