flights radiation warning for FFers!
Sep 13, 2000 | 9:58 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: France,formerly LordGluck,computerly born again
Posts: 133
flights radiation warning for FFers!
I just came across this old BBC news article published in 1999 about flights radiation... which might be of interest but is quite scaring:
excerpt: "frequent flyers on transatlantic flights are exposed to the equivalent of 170 chest X-rays a year, putting them at increased risk of cancer, according to the US Federal Aviation Administration."
Seems that flying Concorde was more dangerous than expected. the same applies to private jets owners as well.
For some "leftist" people both flying "reasonably" and reading the Board ( are there any here?
), this will sound like a revenge of Mother Nature on the arrogant rich flying from one country to exploit another...
Us aviation lawyers will love this article too!!!! ($$$$$$$) ...we FFers might not!
enjoy your reading!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/hea...000/380274.stm
PS I'm well above the critical limit...is there any virtual tomb on flyertalk.com ?
[This message has been edited by LordLuck (edited 09-13-2000).]
excerpt: "frequent flyers on transatlantic flights are exposed to the equivalent of 170 chest X-rays a year, putting them at increased risk of cancer, according to the US Federal Aviation Administration."
Seems that flying Concorde was more dangerous than expected. the same applies to private jets owners as well.
For some "leftist" people both flying "reasonably" and reading the Board ( are there any here?
), this will sound like a revenge of Mother Nature on the arrogant rich flying from one country to exploit another... Us aviation lawyers will love this article too!!!! ($$$$$$$)
...we FFers might not!enjoy your reading!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/hea...000/380274.stm
PS I'm well above the critical limit...is there any virtual tomb on flyertalk.com ?
[This message has been edited by LordLuck (edited 09-13-2000).]
Sep 13, 2000 | 10:15 am
#3
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: YVR
Programs: ACSEMM QRGold SPGLifetimePlat FairmontPlat | TalkBoard Founding Member
Posts: 8,969
Excerpt:
"Pilots are more likely to get colon, rectal, prostate and brain cancers, while flight attendants are twice as likely to suffer breast cancer."
Amazing the way the radiation doesn't target male FA's nor female pilots?!?
Dorian
------------------
Star Alliance RTW Price Chart: http://www.informationlab.com/rtw.htm
Star Alliance Comparison Chart: http://members.home.net/deercroft/starall00.html
"Pilots are more likely to get colon, rectal, prostate and brain cancers, while flight attendants are twice as likely to suffer breast cancer."
Amazing the way the radiation doesn't target male FA's nor female pilots?!?
Dorian
------------------
Star Alliance RTW Price Chart: http://www.informationlab.com/rtw.htm
Star Alliance Comparison Chart: http://members.home.net/deercroft/starall00.html
Sep 13, 2000 | 12:08 pm
#4
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: St Petersburg, FL, USA
Posts: 2,275
Unfortunately, there is nothing you or any lawyer can do to stop inflight radiation.
[very long, informative post from my nuclear engineering days deleted due to FT bug]
The points I was trying to add before they were deleted were
1. Airline workers don't wear dosimetry (unlike power plant or xray workers), so the amount of radiation that they receive is unknown.
2. Flight crews clearly receive more than federal limits on power plant workers, so Homer would be pulled before a flight attendant (maybe not a pilot - they don't work very many hours for their big pay).
3. Pregnant FAs don't have legal protection, unlike radiation workers, who must be pulled once they declare a pregnancy in writing (and not until).
4. No matter what any lawyer or greenie says, it is still far safer than driving. I'd prefer a slight risk of cancer at the age of 70 than a auto collision at 30. Any action that puts more people in cars is completely irresponsible.
5. Even so, those "more likely to receive cancer" studies don't tell the big picture. Repeated studies of power plant workers show that they live -longer- than the general public. This is most likely due to the "healthy worker" effect. I expect that a pilot study would show the same. When everyone else dies at 70, and you get a cancer at 80, are you worse off? I guess it depends on how you keep score.
I'm sure, though, that given a long enough leash, the lawyers will **** everything up through baseless lawsuits that, in the end, won't change the fact that going up in the air gets you a few more bits of radiation. I know the facts, and I prefer to fly.
As an old nuke prof used to say to us, "Aeronautical engineers are allowed to kill people, but you are not!"
[This message has been edited by Tino (edited 09-13-2000).]
[very long, informative post from my nuclear engineering days deleted due to FT bug]
The points I was trying to add before they were deleted were
1. Airline workers don't wear dosimetry (unlike power plant or xray workers), so the amount of radiation that they receive is unknown.
2. Flight crews clearly receive more than federal limits on power plant workers, so Homer would be pulled before a flight attendant (maybe not a pilot - they don't work very many hours for their big pay).
3. Pregnant FAs don't have legal protection, unlike radiation workers, who must be pulled once they declare a pregnancy in writing (and not until).
4. No matter what any lawyer or greenie says, it is still far safer than driving. I'd prefer a slight risk of cancer at the age of 70 than a auto collision at 30. Any action that puts more people in cars is completely irresponsible.
5. Even so, those "more likely to receive cancer" studies don't tell the big picture. Repeated studies of power plant workers show that they live -longer- than the general public. This is most likely due to the "healthy worker" effect. I expect that a pilot study would show the same. When everyone else dies at 70, and you get a cancer at 80, are you worse off? I guess it depends on how you keep score.
I'm sure, though, that given a long enough leash, the lawyers will **** everything up through baseless lawsuits that, in the end, won't change the fact that going up in the air gets you a few more bits of radiation. I know the facts, and I prefer to fly.
As an old nuke prof used to say to us, "Aeronautical engineers are allowed to kill people, but you are not!"
[This message has been edited by Tino (edited 09-13-2000).]
Sep 13, 2000 | 1:00 pm
#5
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,739
I wondered the same thing, Dorian. The results might be due to sexism in that only female FA's and male pilots were studied. Or it could be the professions were studied separately and there weren't enough male FA's and female pilots to show a statistically signifigant result. Or it could just be shoddy journalism, which I suspect is most likely.
Sep 13, 2000 | 7:42 pm
#6
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Ontario
Posts: 2,394
Fedex Pilot report on the subject... http://www.fedexpilot.org/ArcArticle...cle_051800.htm
FAA Advisory on the subject: http://www.faa.gov/avr/aam/ac12052.htm
FAA Advisory on the subject: http://www.faa.gov/avr/aam/ac12052.htm
Sep 14, 2000 | 3:34 am
#7
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: WILD ANIMAL PARK (SAN), CA> GOLD-CO, MARRIOTT, HH, STARWOOD, HYATT,
Posts: 1,373
I am counting on my supplementation to help with those raditation problems. Also
Growth Hormone secretetogoges are a major help.
This all has to do with the IMMUNE SYTEM and AGING!
AN OUNCE OF PREVENTION IS WORTH A POUND OF CURE!
[This message has been edited by ROADRUNNER (edited 09-14-2000).]
Growth Hormone secretetogoges are a major help.
This all has to do with the IMMUNE SYTEM and AGING!
AN OUNCE OF PREVENTION IS WORTH A POUND OF CURE!
[This message has been edited by ROADRUNNER (edited 09-14-2000).]
Sep 15, 2000 | 7:33 am
#8
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 46,817
I don't know about that RR! 
Here's the thread I'd alluded to earlier!:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum94/HTML/000972.html
Here's the thread I'd alluded to earlier!:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum94/HTML/000972.html
Sep 15, 2000 | 5:27 pm
#9
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: WILD ANIMAL PARK (SAN), CA> GOLD-CO, MARRIOTT, HH, STARWOOD, HYATT,
Posts: 1,373
There are specific nutritional supplements, that do help with xray radiation, as well as, solar radiation, that protect you against cancer. Most people are serverly deficient in all of them, and would benefit. OF course, there are many other habits that add to the disease processes especially diet and drink