Radiation and Cigarettes - I did not know this

[ThrownClear]

I was watching a YouTube video where a man was visiting the most radioactive places on earth. Interesting. What I didn't know was that an average smoker's lung receives more radiation in a year than anything that hits people in any of these "hot" spots, or people who work around radioactive materials (apparently, cigarettes contain radioactive polonium and lead).



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRL7o2kPqw0&feature=em-subs_digest

(the bit where he starts comparing locations, jobs, and smoking starts at around 9 minutes)

Anyway. Glad I quit.

 

[twgbonehead]

What a bunch of BS. For one thing, there is no such thing as "Radioactive Lead". Lead is the only element that won't undergo either fission or fusion.

One of the reasons that lead is used (and re-used) for nuclear radiation shielding is that it can absorb radiation without itself becoming radioactive.

ETA:

Well, I learn things on ECF all the time, and not just about e-cigarettes.

While normal lead is very difficult to make radioactive (it's possible if you bombard it with protons in a high-energy cyclotron, but not in normal life) it seems that this is a completely different mechanism.

The radiation comes from Radon, which very quickly becomes polonium. I'm still a bit confused, since I thought that polonium decayed into lead206 (stable). So it's not actually environmental lead (in the sense that it didn't come from the use of leaded gasoline deposits in the soil) it's "Radon-Decay" lead.

Thanks to all of you (later posts) who pointed me in the right direction; still trying to make sense of it all. In any case, it's at the very least surprising at the levels they are discussing; would be nice to have some study that did actual geiger-counter measurements of cigarettes...

 

[Redhotchewy]

Well actually there is some truth to the radioactive lead thing. It's inherently more complicated to explain then active radiation but it goes something like this: When lead absorbs radiation the electrons in the lead particles become charged in a higher state. As the electrons decay back to the ground state they have to release the energy (conservation of energy). This energy normally is released as a beta particle but since lead does not actively transmit beta particles for a number of reasons the kinetic energy is converted into a photon. This is actually how laboratories measure the amount of radioactive material is in a substance in a controlled environment (by measuring the photons generated.)

Now it would be correct to say lead is not inherently radioactive..........before world war II. The measuring devices I previously mentioned actually use lead that was not exposed to the environment during WWII due to the background noise generated by lead that was open and available during that time period. In other words, lead in the environment during WWII actually has some radioactive tendencies due to the fallout effect.

All that said, I still think it's a highly un-researched figure presented in that video. I am prepared to eat my words if someone came up with some good source material but radiation is a fickle thing to pin down to a specific number or quantity for an overall life span average (except for background radiation which we have been measuring since Mdm. Curie.)

Just my two cents from your friendly neighborhood chemist.

 

[skoony]

What a bunch of BS. For one thing, there is no such thing as "Radioactive Lead". Lead is the only element that won't undergo either fission or fusion.

One of the reasons that lead is used (and re-used) for nuclear radiation shielding is that it can absorb radiation without itself becoming radioactive.

he's on the right track.
Radioactive tobacco
google Dr. C. Everett Koop radiation tobacco
regards
mike

 

[Norrin]

So if I go back to smoking I can become an X-man?

 

[drippaboi]

So if I go back to smoking I can become an X-man?

Don't forget to eat bananas by the barrel-full to maximize results.

 

[twgbonehead]

Well, I guess you learn something new every day.... Still, seems like they don't really have any idea how much radiation there actually is:

Conservative estimates put the level of radiation absorbed by a pack-and-a-half a day smoker at the equivalent of 300 chest X-rays every year.5 The Office of Radiation, Chemical & Biological Safety at Michigan State University reports that the radiation level for the same smoker was as high as 800 chest X-rays per year.6 Another report argues that a typical nicotine user might be getting the equivalent of almost 22,000 chest X-rays per year.7

With a range of 300-22,000 I'm not sure I trust these results. And wouldn't food have the same effect, since the radiation is supposedly coming from the fertilizer?

 

[Alien Traveler]

If you are concern of radioactivity of cigarettes you should consider also stop eating brazil nats, bananas, potatoes, do not drink beer and water.
10 Things You Probably Didn't Know Were Radioactive - Listverse
Do not eat human meat also – it is radioactive.

 

[skoony]

If you are concern of radioactivity of cigarettes you should consider also stop eating brazil nats, bananas, potatoes, do not drink beer and water.
10 Things You Probably Didn't Know Were Radioactive - Listverse
Do not eat human meat also – it is radioactive.

this may be so but ,we are talking polonium 210 here.
regards
mike

 

[twgbonehead]

this may be so but ,we are talking polonium 210 here.
regards
mike

Yes, but with a half-life of 138 days there doesn't seem to be much potential for long-term accumulation.

And if it's in the perhaps 1.5 ounces of tobacco I used to smoke a day, how much is in the vegetables, etc that we eat?

 

[drippaboi]

Yes, but with a half-life of 138 days there doesn't seem to be much potential for long-term accumulation.

And if it's in the perhaps 1.5 ounces of tobacco I used to smoke a day, how much is in the vegetables, etc that we eat?

I seem to remember something about how tobacco plants are especially good at leaching heavy metals and other toxins from soil and are able to tolerate much higher concentrations of these materials before the plant is adversely affected when compared to the food you eat. I would imagine the presence of all of these poisons is why tobacco tastes so terrible and makes you want to throw up when ingested.

 

[SuperTaz]

With the amount of analogs I puffed in my life I swear my lungs glowed in the dark!

 

[iamthevoice]

What a bunch of BS. For one thing, there is no such thing as "Radioactive Lead". Lead is the only element that won't undergo either fission or fusion.

One of the reasons that lead is used (and re-used) for nuclear radiation shielding is that it can absorb radiation without itself becoming radioactive.

Actually, it's not quite as simple as that. Radiation is a much more complex topic that can hardly be addressed in two sentences. There are dozens of lead isotopes that are radioactive.

 

[93gc40]

Well, I guess you learn something new every day.... Still, seems like they don't really have any idea how much radiation there actually is:


With a range of 300-22,000 I'm not sure I trust these results. And wouldn't food have the same effect, since the radiation is supposedly coming from the fertilizer?

Many foods are treated with radiation.. Those FDA mandated treatments are probably the source of radiation in cigarettes.

 

[Norrin]

Don't forget to eat bananas by the barrel-full to maximize results.

My name's not Eric

 

[bluecat]

So 1000-10000 years from now when a future race of humans dig up my bones and analyze they will think

1) What kind of crazy humans were we that my bones were radioactive.

2) Aliens dropped me here to survive.

3) What kind of primitive critters roamed the earth 10000 years ago.

4) I must have been someone greatly revered because my bones are radioactive

I think I more concerned about the fluoride I forcibly drank in the 70s because the government thought it was a great idea to pump our water sources full of it.

 

[philoshop]

Don't confuse radiation with radioactivity.
And don't confuse radioactivity with radio activity.

 

[iamthevoice]

Many foods are treated with radiation.. Those FDA mandated treatments are probably the source of radiation in cigarettes.

Food packaging sterilization using radiation is usually done with Cobalt-60. Treated materials are not left radioactive after exposure. It's also used to sterilize medical equipment.

What no one here is discussing is proof; who has actually measured a pack of cigarettes (let alone a statistically valid sample of packs from various sources) to determine the truth to this idea?