Uranium Glass Marbles?

[FrancoRob]

Going around in the web, I've found the annexed news about glass beads. I think that o.2 mR/h is not a bargain, especially if you are often in contact or if you keep them in your nearby.
If this radiation is similar to that emitted by glass marbles, well..... :-X, if you already have them in your house, I think it would be better to store them in a lead box.... also if it is said that they are safe...

 

[Switch]

Geiger counters are expensive stuff 0.2mR/h ,but we're talking about alpha radiation right? So this is stopped by skin, or even a few inches of air. :-/

 

[FrancoRob]

Geiger counters are expensive stuff 0.2mR/h ,but we're talking about alpha radiation right? So this is stopped by skin, or even a few inches of air. :-/

Oh yes, you are right, they are expensive, also if the components are not.....it's the usual commercial law... :-X
We are speaking of alpha radiation for sure (in fact uranium 238 is more known for its toxicity rather than for radiation), anyway also if its radiation are blocked by the skin, skin absorb them...so (as you can read by the annexed article) handling it for long time it could cause local problems.

I'm not saying it can be dangerously harmful for the human body, I want to say that it is not a simple toy; you must take into account that some cumulative effects may exists too (the first article I have annexed shows a map of the USA which gives a general behaviour of local radiation fallout due to cosmic radiation, ground (radon) etc. BTW, I don't want to show a dark situation, but just to say (I repeat) that this glass beads may not be an innocuous simple toy.

 

[Switch]

Well then, I guess having a bracelet from uranium glass and wearing it all day every day would be a really bad idea.

 

[FrancoRob]

Well then, I guess having a bracelet from uranium glass and wearing it all day every day would be a really bad idea.

[smiley=thumbsup.gif]

 

[MarioMaster]

I have a geiger counter coming on tuesday, I'll let you know how radioactive my cracked ones are

 

[Dark_Horse]

[quote author=Switch link=1225337223/40#51 date=1226065435]Well then, I guess having a bracelet from uranium glass and wearing it all day every day would be a really bad idea.

[smiley=thumbsup.gif][/quote]

Franco,
These "beads" or marbles are commonly used for making jewlery, amulets, and the such. Are you suggesting that there are health concerns with these? I have never heard anybody suggest that these have any danger whatsoever. I was told that the radiation within the glass, (not emitted from it), is about 2x the normal "background" radiation, something like you might get by climbing to the top of a medium-high mountain. What actually makes it off the surface of the glass is supposedly barley able to be measured, (or none at all), as such they are legal, without restriction everywhere as far as I can find out. Do you information to the contrary? Even the information you posted seams to support them being as safe as any other glass-marble. Should we be concerned?

And BTW- If you boil the marbles for a while in water, and drop them into cold/ice water, they will crackle.
DH

 

[MarioMaster]

well the glass traps most of the alpha particles that the uranium would be emitting, but beta and gamma radiation can still pass fairly easily - but the actual mass of uranium in the marbles is quite low and the radiation levels not much to be concerned with

 

[phoenix3200]

And BTW- If you boil the marbles for a while in water, and drop them into cold/ice water, they will crackle.

I was hoping I wouldn't need a butane lighter. I'll try it once I get home.

 

[FrancoRob]

DH:
This is the reason why I asked if someone checked them with a geiger counter: MarioMaster will be surely able to check them in order to dissipate any doubt.
The news I got in the web are relevant the glass beads used to check the geiger counter proper operation. I hope that the glass marbles will show a lover radiation level.
The table contained in the following ref. that I already annexed to my first post, speaks clearly:
1) 2 mSv/yr (approx) is the typical background radiation from natural sources, including an average of 0.7 mSv/yr from radon in air. This is close to the minimum dose received by all humans anywhere on Earth.
2) 3-5 mSv/yr is the typical dose rate (above background) received by uranium miners in Australia and Canada.
3) 50 mSv is, conservatively, the lowest dose at which there is any evidence of cancer being caused in adults. It is also the highest dose which is allowed by regulation in any one year of occupational exposure. Dose rates greater than 50 mSv/yr arise from natural background levels in several parts of the world but do not cause any discernible harm to local populations.

Now, point 1) states that that 2 mSv/yr (this means a continuous exposure to this value for 1 yr) is the typical exposure everywhere on Earth. Point 2) says that a doubled dose is typical for Australia and Canada uranium miners; this should give the feeling that such an exposure doesn't harm the miners.
Point 3) states that this is a limit dose (for the same exposure time, I guess) that doesn't show any cancer risk.

MarioMaster is right, the uranium quantity in the marble must be very low, anyway the last word goes to the geiger counter: supposing that a glass marble emits the same radiation of the glass bead in the "Vaseline Glass Test Source", if you keep one glass marble in your pocket for one year, you are in the condition of point 2). But if you keep on your body a necklace of, let me say, 30 glass marbles for one year, it could be that you get 2 mSv x 30 = 60 mSv!

So, if you say me to have heard that these glass marbles emit a radiation that is 2x the normal ground radiation (which is 2 mSv, as per point 1)), this could be that each marble emits 4 mSv?

But these are Hypotesis, let MarioMaster check them!

 

[wicked1]

DH:

if you keep one glass marble in your pocket for one year, you are in the condition of point 2). But if you keep on your body a necklace of, let me say, 30 glass marbles for one year, it could be that you get 2 mSv x 30 = 60 mSv!

I don't think that's right. Just rather than one small spot in your pocket, or one small spot on your neck getting exposed to 2 mSv a larger area gets exposed to 2mSv. But, even if you jumped in a pool full of these marbles your body would still be experiencing 2 mSv

 

[rocketparrotlet]

It's already been said: alpha radiation is blocked by skin. This is why even direct handling of U-238 pieces is not dangerous. It emits mostly alpha and a small bit of beta, but not enough to do harm. Wearing uranium glass is safe for this reason as well. There is no need to store it in a lead box, and a Geiger counter is unnecessary for such low levels of radiation (200 CPM is nothing. The Trinity site is considered safe to visitors, and I think it has almost 1,000 CPM. Normal background radiation is about 100 CPM, higher in many parts of Europe.)

-Mark

 

[Dark_Horse]

DH:
This is the reason why I asked if someone checked them with a geiger counter: MarioMaster will be surely able to check them in order to dissipate any doubt.
The news I got in the web are relevant the glass beads used to check the geiger counter proper operation. I hope that the glass marbles will show a lover radiation level.
The table contained in the following ref. that I already annexed to my first post, speaks clearly:
1) 2 mSv/yr (approx) is the typical background radiation from natural sources, including an average of 0.7 mSv/yr from radon in air. This is close to the minimum dose received by all humans anywhere on Earth.
2) 3-5 mSv/yr is the typical dose rate (above background) received by uranium miners in Australia and Canada.
3) 50 mSv is, conservatively, the lowest dose at which there is any evidence of cancer being caused in adults. It is also the highest dose which is allowed by regulation in any one year of occupational exposure. Dose rates greater than 50 mSv/yr arise from natural background levels in several parts of the world but do not cause any discernible harm to local populations.

Now, point 1) states that that 2 mSv/yr (this means a continuous exposure to this value for 1 yr) is the typical exposure everywhere on Earth. Point 2) says that a doubled dose is typical for Australia and Canada uranium miners; this should give the feeling that such an exposure doesn't harm the miners.
Point 3) states that this is a limit dose (for the same exposure time, I guess) that doesn't show any cancer risk.

MarioMaster is right, the uranium quantity in the marble must be very low, anyway the last word goes to the geiger counter: supposing that a glass marble emits the same radiation of the glass bead in the "Vaseline Glass Test Source", if you keep one glass marble in your pocket for one year, you are in the condition of point 2). But if you keep on your body a necklace of, let me say, 30 glass marbles for one year, it could be that you get 2 mSv x 30 = 60 mSv!

So, if you say me to have heard that these glass marbles emit a radiation that is 2x the normal ground radiation (which is 2 mSv, as per point 1)), this could be that each marble emits 4 mSv?

But these are Hypotesis, let MarioMaster check them!

The key element here, (pun not intended), is that the "2x normal" figure that I have been quoted, was the amount of radiation, inside of the glass, not actually emitted from it. I was told you would only get a reading of any kind from a very sensitive instrument in direct-contact with the uranium-doped glass, 1mm away, nothing, (only background). Like wicked suggested, you would need to be immersed in a pool of tiny-glass beads to actually have this radiation contact your skin, is my understanding.
I agree completely, we are all operating from hear-say, (which I dislike). If Mario-Master, or anyone else with access to proper equipment and experience is able to analyze these Uranium-marble, I would be willing to get them in the mail to you for analysis, just PM me with you address.
I do not want to be alarmist just becasue we have a limited understanding of this material, I also do not want to be selling potentially dangerous products, (which I am 99% sure I am not). Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks,
DH

 

[FrancoRob]

Wicked1:
It's a problem of how many are the contaminant sources.... (See pic.)

Rocketparrotlet:
You're right:
100 CPM = 0.1mR/hr = 0.001 mSv/hr
I did a big mistake in my reply #57, as 0.2 mR/hr are equivalent to 0.002 mSv/hr (200 CPM)! :-[

So my answer to MarioMaster must be corrected as follows: supposing that a glass marble emits the same radiation of the glass bead in the "Vaseline Glass Test Source", if you keep one glass marble in your pocket for one year, you have been subjected to 0.002 mSv/year.
So, in the worst condition of a 30 glasses necklace, a person could be subjected to a global irradiation of 0.06 mSv/year.

 

[FrancoRob]

Uh, I spent some time to put down my last answer (I don't know how, but my first simple question has produced a sort of "avalanche" effect ) and I'm not a radiation expert for sure....

Switch:
I have to correct my Reply#43: 0.01 mR/hr are equivalent to 0.0001 mSv/hr, and it is a low value.....

DH:
a practical verification is for sure the simplest way to cut-off any doubt. If MarioMaster will get a sufficiently sensitive geiger counter, I think he will be able to perform the test while I'm not sure to be able to for a loss of time, as at the end of the second next week I'll leave Italy (where I live) to go to spend Christmas time with my daughter, in California. . I'm not sure that the post will be fast enough to bring me your package in right time.

 

[laserwanabe]

I would love to get a couple of these marbles but after reading briefly, now I'm iffy about them.


I'll keep checking to see if Mario replies, and please dull the answer down for the readers convenience.