Re: an infant got x-rayed (was Re: Pablo Picasso's sculptures gotx-rayed)
Ryuji, I don't know the details, but I too have often wondered why people insist on having slow film hand-inspected rather than putting it through the carry-on luggage X-ray scanner. I have never actually seen any documented evidence of film being ruined by such a scanner.
I've read in the past that film gets exposed to more high-energy radiation during a flight (due to increased cosmic ray penetration at high altitudes) than it does in a carry-on luggage X-ray scanner. I don't know how true this is.
X-ray scanners for checked luggage are a different story, as they are much larger and more powerful.
Ryuji Suzuki wrote:
Another curious note is this: In the several seconds the baby spent in the machine, the doctor added, he was exposed to as much radiation as he would naturally get from cosmic rays — or high energy from outer space — in a day. (quoted from LA Times link above) Is this really true? Then what's the point of asking for hand inspection of films? (if it's carried on anyway) The bar graph in the article (as well as the video) indicates that the radiation dose of the x-ray luggage screener is 1 mREM and this indeed is not that much.
-- Jordan Wosnick firstname.lastname@example.org