Kathlyn asked Kate Moore:

We were listening to the audio book and it doesn't say that at all. Your book confuses rays and particles and attributes the most damage to the gamma radiation. It also fails to mention the critically important fact that radium is a 'bone seeker'. Why?

Kate Moore Hi Kathlyn. Thank you for your two messages. I haven't listened to the audiobook but I'd be surprised if the text changes so dramatically from the text in the printed book; the quotes I shared with you are what is in my book (and what should be in the audiobook too!). Re: particles vs rays, from my research *some* people seem to use the terms interchangeably (e.g. even today the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency website talks of Alpha Particles and says that they are 'also termed alpha radiation or alpha rays'). In addition, in writing the book I drew on the historical resources I was researching with and many of these used the term 'alpha rays' (etc.) too. Not being a scientist myself to know, perhaps this term is now considered completely outdated or overly simplified. Perhaps I can look to amend it to 'particles' in future editions. As for the bone-seeker point, this is mentioned on page 110, when I'm describing the Drinkers' theories on radium being the cause of the girls' illnesses. Perhaps you haven't got to that bit yet. I hope this response answers all your queries. Thank you very much for listening to the book. All best wishes, Kate

flag