Running CRTs without implosion protection glass
toby at telegraphics.com.au
Fri Jul 1 15:40:31 CDT 2016
On 2016-07-01 4:08 PM, Fred Cisin wrote:
>> Not a very good comparison because one is pointed at your head for
>> months or years and the latter is momentary.
> On Fri, 1 Jul 2016, tony duell wrote:
> I am not convinced that the effect is purely cumulative anyway. In other
> a lower intensity (and lower energy) beam for longer might not do as
> much damage as a brief pulse from a high intensity, high energy source.
Granted. But this is all well studied, we can just look up the numbers
and the science. Probably something people using unshielded CRTs are
best motivated to do.
> The "pro-nuclear" community calls it the "LNT" ("Linear No Threshold")
> How much of the health damage of early color TV was due, not to the
> hardware, but to the quality of the content?
> (USA networks were/are clearly worse than BBC)
More information about the cctech