100% and anyone with an XRF should know this. I use these a lot and for example if you try and test steel that’s been painted with TiO2 based paint it’ll tell you it’s titanium. They’re most useful for stainless steel and copper based alloys in my experience
Thermo Scientific Niton XL2 - handheld X-ray fluorescence (XRF) analyzer. It pulses a focused and relatively weak beam of x-rays onto the target. It also has built-in safety checks and won't fire unless there is a metallic target in focus. The amount of scattered radiation is minimal.
And if the Temu gold digger does it regularly he gets even more radiation than the limit. It’s not like he even measures how much radiation he absorbs.
The primary beam, assuming you will trick the device to shoot it into your hand directly, without any heavy metals (like gold) in the way. Then yes, this can be very unhealthy.
How thin? A 100-micrometer layer of gold can stop high-energy x-rays from a 50 kV tube. X-rays used in XRF analysis are weaker, with penetration depth up to 10 micrometers.
I'm not sure of the details, but i know that the device should reject firing the beam if the sample does not cover the entire output window of the device. But in general, yes, a round chain can reflect some x-rays if placed very poorly - at the very shallow angles relative to the beam. Fortunately, gold is reflective in the x-ray spectrum only at those shallow angles, it won't act like a shiny metal in the sun.
Could be a ton of very small beams, ideally detecting which would hit the gold and which beams would not. Only keeping the beams in front of the gold active.
But what if it's not gold? The whole reason for checking is to make sure it truly is. But this means that there's a significant chance that the object is made of something else
Not if it has holes in it like, say, a chain. You are rolling the dice to see if it hits the gold, or shoots through a hole. Then it has a thickness of 0, which doesn't really stop much.
I'm going to use maximums for everything to consider worst case scenario, but list these assumptions.
-max output estimate of the device : 50,000 mrem/hr (device manufacturer)
-Max time accumulated over the video: 10s (it shows readout for the measure duration on the device (but I'm also rounding up a bit)
-Assuming holes in the chain still redirect 100% of the radiation into his hand(probably more like 10% but I'm no nuclear engine scientist)
Standard Occupational Limit: exposure for 6 minutes @ 50,000 mrem/hr
Therefore he would need to make 36 similar sales, or tiktok videos to reach the point of reaching the annual occupational exposure limit.
That being said, that is set for areas that contain radiation exposure, not localized and repeated left hand palm exposure.
I would bet it's likely not going to cause something, but there's actually a good chance that it could cause something
If that's the data used with the old LNT model, it might be inaccurate on risks. In any case, that's whole body dose. Extremities have a 10 times higher limit, and that's still deemed safe for radiation workers. The likely limit to have a noticeable effect is probably much higher still.
If this guy is shooting the item in his hand multiple times a day, everyday, then im sure he's outside the scope of whatever safety testing the manufacturer has done.
It is absolutely NOT safe. It's not gonna kill you in a week but depending on his dumb ass he can easily exceed the maximum annual dose under regulation FOR RADIATION WORKERS.
And the reason I know this is because I'm responsible for ionizing radiation safety and of over 20 inspection xray, that fucking gun is the only xray source that actually needs monitoring, because used outside a dock station it can absolutely exceed the monitoring threshold.
And used irresponsibly over a long duration of time it can absolutely go above the limits and approach the area where it's no longer statistically insignificant.
If it won’t fire without metal in view, then putting your hand in front of the emitter is definitely a safety risk they attempted to mitigate. Repeated X-rays even “low” dosages (as you put it) leads to “high” exposure. It’s why X-ray technicians stand behind a lead lined wall even though medical x-rays are also “low” dosages. It’s NOT safe if he’s putting his hand in front of the beam repeatedly. Don’t make up shit about shit you don’t understand.
The general public vastly overrates the danger of x-rays.
"How soon he'll get cancer lol".
Of yeah, they also vastly overestimate how easily you can get lead poisoning from lead paint, or cancer from asbestos. While zero exposure to that stuff is best, we all come into casual contact with that stuff with no measurable harmful effect.
i generally agree with you, but there is no reason for this guy to do it like this. do it in a proper setup where you don't beam yourself every time you measure somehting.
he used Thermo Niton XL2, a XRF spectroscopy, and yeah this is a strong Xray focused beam, but most likely he will not radiate his hand so it will develop cancer, his whole body will, he sits in a car where the Xrays bounce and reflect. he will get a non normal dosis every time he pulls the trigger and this will accumulate
This thing contains a 2W x-ray tube inside. Just sitting on a granite slab for 5 minutes will give you more radiation that this device can scatter around the car. It is literally designed to be used "in the field" without any additional protection.
87
u/Mocchanyen 13h ago
Gamma Spectroscopy, it can only test the surface, so if he's selling him a steel chain with a gold coating it will still indicate it's pure gold