History
The concept of the rem first appeared in the literature in 1945, and was given its first definition in 1947. The definition was refined in 1950 as "that dose of any ionizing radiation which produces a relevant biological effect equal to that produced by one roentgen of high-voltage x-radiation." This definition left open the question of what might be considered a "relevant biological effect," and did not prescribe if the roentgen should be measured in air, water, or tissue. Using data available at the time, the rem was variously evaluated as 83, 93, or 95 erg/gram. Along with the introduction of the rad in 1953, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) decided to "continue" the use of the rem. The US National Committee on Radiation Protection and Measurements noted in 1954 that this effectively implied an increase in the magnitude of the rem to match the rad (100 erg/gram). The ICRP officially adopted the rem as the unit of equivalent dose in 1962 to measure the way different types of radiation distribute energy in tissue, and began recommending values of relative biological effectiveness (RBE) for various types of radiation. In practice, the unit of rem was used to denote that an RBE factor had been applied to a number which was originally in units of rad or roentgen. In 1977 the rem was redefined by the ICRP as 0.01 sievert or 0.01 J/kg, with the intention that the sievert would come to replace the rem.
The International Committee for Weights and Measures (CIPM) adopted the sievert in 1980, but never accepted the use of the rem. The U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) recognizes that this unit is outside the SI, but temporarily accepts its use in the US with the SI. The rem remains in widespread use as an industry standard in the US. The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission still permits the use of the units curie, rad and rem alongside SI units.
Read more about this topic: Roentgen Equivalent Man
Famous quotes containing the word history:
“In history as in human life, regret does not bring back a lost moment and a thousand years will not recover something lost in a single hour.”
—Stefan Zweig (18811942)
“I believe that in the history of art and of thought there has always been at every living moment of culture a “will to renewal.” This is not the prerogative of the last decade only. All history is nothing but a succession of “crises”Mof rupture, repudiation and resistance.... When there is no “crisis,” there is stagnation, petrification and death. All thought, all art is aggressive.”
—Eugène Ionesco (b. 1912)
“Systematic philosophical and practical anti-intellectualism such as we are witnessing appears to be something truly novel in the history of human culture.”
—Johan Huizinga (1872–1945)