Are x-ray machines dangerous to those who work with them daily?
927391
I'm very interested in becoming an radiology technologist, and from what I've heard, nowadays, the equipment is so good and improved that techs recieve little or no radiation.  There are actually little pins that techs can wear to track how much radiation they are exposed to, and like I said, with the new equipment, the pins have been very helpful in confirming the lack of exposure.
353907
depens what you had the xray on but it usually means that they found something in the xray which shouldn't be there or isn't right.. its rather self explanitory really
118584
Danger to medical personell and patients.
426943
Yes. Dangerous to the person and the committed relations if U have any.
286871
Actually, x-rays films are also very senstive to light. Light is what is actually used to expose the film to the image. \nIf an x-ray film was only senstive to x-rays they a patient would require a very high dose of radiation in order to produce an image (this is how it was done in the 1950's).\nToday we have these deveices called Intensifying Screens. The x-rays hit the intensifying screens and then give off light to make the image on the film (this helps to decrease the dose of radiation that that patient will be exposed to because the screens take each xray photon and multiple it by a lot.)\n\nAnd now to how x-ray film is developed.\n1963 to 1993 \n\nIn 1963 when I was first introduced to the X-ray business, film processors were really in their infancy. When I talk about "X-ray film processors", I mean those devices that were automated in some fashion, and the processing of film was taken out of the hands of the X-ray technician. \n\nThe first Hospital that I walked into with the man that was assigned to train me, had probably one of the first X-ray film processors in the St. Paul, Minneapolis, Minnesota area. It was a Kodak M1 or M2 processor. It was more than 8 feet long, and took 10 to 15 minutes to process a film from "dry to dry". The roller racks in the processor were so large that a "traveling" crane was attached to the ceiling to lift the racks out of the processing fluid tanks. The crane was designed to move up and down the line of travel in order to lift one or another of the racks out of the tanks. It could then be moved to lower the rack at the side of the processor where the rack could be cleaned. These roller racks allowed the film to travel in a somewhat vertical fashion, down and up, through the chemistries. The film would be fed into the rack and follow a "turn-around" which would direct the film down into the bath, traveling through the rollers. Than the film would be directed through a turn around at the bottom of the rack and brought back up to be sent over to the next rack. This was the beginning of automated film processing. I would say that the Kodak company was the father of the automated processor. There could have been others that were there 1st, but I didn't know about them. \n\nOther companies came on line soon after, but Kodak (I think) still dominates the market with its processor line. \n\nI think a step back in time, is in order to look at what the X-ray technician had to do before the automated processor became popular. \n\nThe dark room consisted of 2 or 3 tanks that were filled with chemistry. The tanks were than contained in a massive tank filled with tempered water. The water was constantly circulating and replaced as it drained out, at a controlled temperature, usually 68 degrees F. This arrangement kept the chemistry at the required temperature, so that the films could come out with very little variation in density, contrast, fog, (Etc.). The tanks were arranged so that the developer chemistry was at one end, with a "Stop" bath (sometimes) next, than the fixer chemistry, and sometimes a tank was used for the wash bath. Fixer chemistries were later changed to contain the "stop" action needed to stop development. This did away with the stop bath portion of the system. Usually the wash was done in the master water tank where the circulating water would aid in washing the film. \n\nIn this system, the film in a special holder, would be placed in the developer tank for a specified time (5 minutes more or less). Than the film was moved to the stop bath, if the system used one, or moved into the fixer tank for 10 or more minutes. Then the film was moved into the wash where it could be left for up to 20 minutes. After that the film was moved into a tall heated drying rack which looked like a large clothes locker. Depending on temperature the film would be dry in 15 to 20 minutes. \n\nCan you imagine? Some thing had to be done
274396
yes, as long as the Osteopath is trained, licensed & certified.\nI broke my back in 3 places d/t an automobile accident. My chiropractor would not even touch me without x-rays to see what was going on inside.\nYou may want to consider this, too; taking some x-rays. Just a safety precaution.
1002593
No, radiologists only operate "picturing" machines like Roentgen, MRI, CT and make diagnosis based on the pictures.
223694
See article here:\nhttp://www.straightdope.com/classics/a950120.html\n\nIt is suggested you move further away from your computer or purchase one with 2.5 milligauss limits on the extremely low frequency magnetic fields.  You can also limit the time spend in front of or near a computer, or if you're really worried cease using a computer all together.  \n\nThen again, no one is sure that radiation is even a problem with computers.  It may or may not be hazardous, just like anything else in life.  Years ago they said eggs were good for you...then they were unhealthy and full of cholesterol...now they can carry salmonella...who knows.
62020
Known as X-rays, Roentgen rays are routinely used to assess dental health and used as needed for analysis of bone fractures, and lung ailments and diseases such as cancer. Since there is a slight risk of cancer due to excessive exposure to X-rays, they are not used for routine checkups as they once were (e.g., fluoroscopes). See the ref.
851852
X-rays are a form of electromagnetic radiation with a wavelength in the range of 10 to 0.01 nanometres, corresponding to frequencies in the range 30 to 30 000 PHz (1015 hertz). X-rays are primarily used for diagnostic radiography and crystallography. X-rays are a form of ionizing radiation and as such can be dangerous. In many languages it is called Röntgen radiation after the investigator of the radiation, Wilhelm Röntgen.\nUSES:\nMedical uses\nX-rays can reveal the details of bones and teeth\nEnlarge\nX-rays can reveal the details of bones and teeth\nX-Ray Image of a male skull\nEnlarge\nX-Ray Image of a male skull\n\nSince Röntgen's discovery that X-rays can identify bony structures, X-rays have been developed for their use in medical imaging. Radiology is a specialized field of medicine. Radiographers employ radiography and other techniques for diagnostic imaging. Indeed, this is probably the most common use of X-ray technology.\n\nX-rays are especially useful in the detection of pathology of the skeletal system, but are also useful for detecting some disease processes in soft tissue. Some notable examples are the very common chest X-ray, which can be used to identify lung diseases such as pneumonia, lung cancer or pulmonary edema, and the abdominal X-ray, which can detect ileus (blockage of the intestine), free air (from visceral perforations) and free fluid (in ascites). In some cases, the use of X-rays is debatable, such as gallstones (which are rarely radiopaque) or kidney stones (which are often visible, but not always). Also, traditional plain X-rays pose very little use in the imaging of soft tissues such as the brain or muscle. Imaging alternatives for soft tissues are computed axial tomography (CAT or CT scanning), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or ultrasound. Since 2005, X-rays are listed as a carcinogen by the U.S. government.\n\nRadiotherapy, a curative medical intervention, now used almost exclusively for cancer, employs higher energies of radiation.\n\nThe efficiency of X-ray tubes is less than 2%. Most of the energy is used to heat up the anode.\n\nThe use of X-rays for medical purposes (to develop into the field of radiation therapy) was pioneered by Major John Hall-Edwards in Birmingham, England. In 1908, he had to have his left arm amputated owing to the spread of X-ray dermatitis[2]. In the 1950s X-rays were used to produce an X-ray microscope.
399783
Absolutely not. I strongly encourage you to get a hold of OSHA as soon as possible. Don't forget where those drugs are ending up by dumping them down the drain. The employer is 100% responsible for the safety of his staff and the animals that are in his care. If anyone gets sick because of the exposure to radiation, he is criminally responsible, infact, he is criminally responsible for the dumping of drugs down the drain. This veterinary clinic needs to be reported for illegal practices as soon as possible. Don't let your health be compromised by a vet who seems to be too cheap to properly equip his employees with the proper gear needed. Remember, this is your life, don't let someone else decide if you will get sick or not.
437815
The previous post is pure bunk.\n\nMillions of dollars have been spent and thousands of people have been tracked and interviewed over decades in an attempt to scientifically prove or disprove a link between ill health and electromagnetic fields. And guess what? They can't find one. There is no known biological mechanism for the low-level radiation from power lines to damage DNA. \n\nPeople used to worry about the same things resulting from the use of microwave ovens, but I guess that scare has passed. The low level radiation from power lines is even less than that emitted by microwaves. Radiation from cell phones isn't a health issue, either.\n\nHere's a relevant passage from Christopher Wanjek's "Bad Medicine: Misconceptions and Misuses Revealed, from Distance Healing to Vitamin O":\n\n"Many folks seem to equate all kinds of radiation with the dangerous kind, called ionizing radiation. This type of radiation is energetic enough to knock an electron loose from an atom. Many types of radiation pass through our bodies all the time. Although you cannot shine a flashlight (visible light) through your chest, radio waves and microwaves will pass through easily enough. Ionizing radiation also passes through you, but it can damage the atoms in your cells as it travels, knocking loose an electron from a DNA molecule. Ultraviolet light is ionizing radiation; too much of it causes skin cancer. X rays and gamma rays are also ionizing. Too many X-ray exams can lead to organ cancers. Fortunately, the nastiest forms of ionizing radiation are produced in deep space, and the earth's atmosphere blocks most of this from reaching the earth's surface (although that hole in the ozone layer is letting in more UV). ...Over 80% of the ionizing radiation we encounter day to day comes from natural sources: cosmic rays, which are atomic particles from space; and alpha and beta particles from radioactive gas, namely radon. ...Medical X rays account for about all the rest of our ionizing radiation exposure."\n\nYou don't have to move, and no one's brain is being harmed.
202420
Are you addressing specifically the high voltage portion of the monitor? It's not that deadly. I have never heard of anyone killing themselves by opening a monitor.
348781
mobile phones use the spectrum below the visible wave length  (  and below IR  ) . those frequencies have low energy typically (though MW is used for cooking...) and are not considered of the ionizing radiation type, which is on the other side of the spectrum ( above UV ). For example: X rays, Gamma rays, etc'...which are definitely dangerous. Nonetheless I'd use a cautious approach and common logic when using any radiating device which has only been around for a few years . if there are negative effects we shall see them years from now on the "heavy users" of cell phones...\nanother issue is that those tumors i guess you're referring to occur because of DNA braking up during transcription by exposure to ionizing radiations ( which has a short enough wave-length ) , that could most definitely NOT occur with your cell phone!\n\nso my answer is - NOT LIKELY.
780803
they will harm your health.
1109225
not only did they go to school for a highly trained skill, the machines they use aren't cheap.  everyone thinks that when you go for an X ray and use those machines that its very costly, except IT IS COSTLY.  those machines cost HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS.  for you to pay $80 is peanuts when you look at the big picture.  and their aren't millions of them like cars so they can't be mass produced, they are hand made.  And that is why going to the dentist and any other type of doctor that has those types of machines is so expensive.  \n\nThey're not trying to rip you off, in fact they are trying to give you teh best price THEY CAN AFFORD.
629035
There may be some, but it's too little to be a health concern.  Even the ambient radiation at Bikini Atoll is not extreme; the danger comes from the local trees (and any local crops), which would take up and concentrate radioisotopes in their tissues.