| ▲ | uh_uh 5 days ago |
| > Remember that you'll get comparable levels of radiation even if you commute through the grand central station every day. Gemini says this: > A single typical CT scan delivers a dose that is roughly 1,000 to over 5,000 times higher than the dose you'd get from spending a few hours in Grand Central Terminal. Where did you get that from? |
|
| ▲ | dragonwriter 5 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| If the hallucination machine can cite a source, check and cite that for facts, but don't cite the hallucination machine. |
| |
| ▲ | uh_uh 5 days ago | parent [-] | | Weird you don't have this requirement for the OP spewing his urban myths above. | | |
| ▲ | ssl-3 5 days ago | parent [-] | | Human hallucinations are natural. Machine hallucinations are avoidable. | | |
| ▲ | uh_uh 5 days ago | parent [-] | | Was it hallucinating here, or are the commenters hallucinating? What OP is saying is just not true. A CT scan and normal daily commute in Grand Central station are NOT comparable in terms of radiation received. Somehow this is controversial because an AI said it? | | |
| ▲ | ssl-3 5 days ago | parent [-] | | The machine appears to have hallucinated the incomparable comparison, instead of a human. (And I'm not picking on the machine at all here. I use it all the time. At first, I used to treat it like an idiot intern that shouldn't have been hired at all: Creative and full of spirit, but untrustworthy and all ideas need to be filtered. But lately, it's more like an decent apprentice who has a hangover and isn't thinking straight today. The machine has been getting better as time presses on, but it still goes rather aloof from time to time.) | | |
| ▲ | uh_uh a day ago | parent [-] | | I don't understand how was the machine hallucinating? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | Guvante 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Did you actually discredit someone or have you not properly considered your units in this response? Commute through the Grand Central station everyday is certainly not a few hours. And people don't tend to get a CT scan very frequently so the timeline here is massive. |
| |
| ▲ | uh_uh 5 days ago | parent [-] | | In your opinion how many hours spent in Grand Central station equal the radiation received from a CT scan? | | |
| ▲ | itishappy 5 days ago | parent [-] | | Somewhere between 7 and 700 days. CT Scan: 10-1000 mrem Grand Central Station: 525 mrem / yr https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED297952.pdf | | |
| ▲ | uh_uh 5 days ago | parent [-] | | So OP's statement is true for people who live IN the station. | | |
| ▲ | itishappy 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | It's roughly 40 min per workday over a typical year. That's a bit high but not unreasonably so. | | |
| ▲ | uh_uh 5 days ago | parent [-] | | That would amount to 10 mrem of radiation per year. I don't believe this is a realistic estimate for a CT scan though. From epa.gov [1]: - Head CT: 2.0 mSv (200 mrem) - Chest CT: 8.0 mSv (800 mrem) - Abdomen CT: 10 mSv (1,000 mrem) - Pelvis CT: 10 mSv (1,000 mrem) So for a head CT, one would need to spend more than 13 hours per workday in the station. OP was off at least an order of magnitude. https://www.epa.gov/radiation/frequent-questions-radiation-m... | | |
| ▲ | riahi 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | This data is from 2006. Over 20 years, there has been substantial progress in CT radiation reduction through model-based iterative reconstruction and now ML-assisted reconstruction, aside from iterative advances in detector sensitivity and now photon-counting CT. In clinical practice, those doses are about 2-3x what I see on the machine dose reports every day at my place of work. In thin patients who can hold still, I've done full-cycle cardiac CT and achieved a < 1 mSv dose. We are always trying to get the dose down while still being diagnostic. Source: Practicing radiologist. | |
| ▲ | itishappy 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Fair enough. That was the first number I pulled from Google, but I trust your source a good deal more. |
|
| |
| ▲ | ramraj07 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | I used the word comparable. Given they are in the same ballpark of log scale i stand vindicated in my opinion. Also there's an apple store there. RIP all the geniuses there i suppose |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | ramraj07 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| So if you pass through GCT every day it does become comparable to a CT scan? |
