doses – Übersetzung – Keybot-Wörterbuch

Spacer TTN Translation Network TTN TTN Login Français English Spacer Help
Ausgangssprachen Zielsprachen
Keybot 43 Ergebnisse  curriculum.cna.ca
  Fiches d'information  
Tableau 2 - Doses moyennes de rayonnement provenant de sources artificielles (mSv/an)
Table 2 - Typical radiation doses from man-made sources (mSv/yr)
  Fiches d'information  
Comme pour beaucoup d�autres choses, l�effet des rayonnements varie selon la dose. Les tr�s fortes doses, de l�ordre de 5 000 mSv ou plus, peuvent �tre mortelles. Les doses plus faibles peuvent provoquer un cancer de nombreuses ann�es apr�s l�exposition.
Like many other things, the effect of radiation depends on the dose. Very large doses, in the order of 5,000 millisieverts or more, can be lethal. Smaller doses can produce cancer after many years. There is still uncertainty about the effect of very small doses such as we receive from man-made sources. In many locations in the world the dose of radiation from natural sources is many times that of the average given above; yet there is no evidence that the people living in those areas have any increased rate of cancer or other undesirable effects. Recent research in Japan and France has shown that small doses of radiation can be beneficial in the treatment of disease.
  Fiches d'information  
Comme pour beaucoup d�autres choses, l�effet des rayonnements varie selon la dose. Les tr�s fortes doses, de l�ordre de 5 000 mSv ou plus, peuvent �tre mortelles. Les doses plus faibles peuvent provoquer un cancer de nombreuses ann�es apr�s l�exposition.
Like many other things, the effect of radiation depends on the dose. Very large doses, in the order of 5,000 millisieverts or more, can be lethal. Smaller doses can produce cancer after many years. There is still uncertainty about the effect of very small doses such as we receive from man-made sources. In many locations in the world the dose of radiation from natural sources is many times that of the average given above; yet there is no evidence that the people living in those areas have any increased rate of cancer or other undesirable effects. Recent research in Japan and France has shown that small doses of radiation can be beneficial in the treatment of disease.
  Irradiation des insectes  
Selon cette technique, on plaçait les insectes mâles dans un conteneur blindé pour les stériliser au moyen d’un radio-isotope (cobalt 60 ou césium 137) émettant de faibles doses de rayons gamma, puis on les relâchait dans la nature.
By the mid 1990s the outbreak had subsided and the spray programs in Atlantic Canada effectively ended. However, outbreaks of the spruce budworm occur about every 35 years, meaning Canada is almost due for another outbreak. With many of the chemical pesticides used in the past now banned and questions about the true environmental impact of biological agents not yet fully understood, what other possible alternatives exist to help control or eradicate insect pests like the spruce budworm? One possible alternative is ionizing radiation.
  Fiches d'information  
Comme pour beaucoup d�autres choses, l�effet des rayonnements varie selon la dose. Les tr�s fortes doses, de l�ordre de 5 000 mSv ou plus, peuvent �tre mortelles. Les doses plus faibles peuvent provoquer un cancer de nombreuses ann�es apr�s l�exposition.
Like many other things, the effect of radiation depends on the dose. Very large doses, in the order of 5,000 millisieverts or more, can be lethal. Smaller doses can produce cancer after many years. There is still uncertainty about the effect of very small doses such as we receive from man-made sources. In many locations in the world the dose of radiation from natural sources is many times that of the average given above; yet there is no evidence that the people living in those areas have any increased rate of cancer or other undesirable effects. Recent research in Japan and France has shown that small doses of radiation can be beneficial in the treatment of disease.
  Les rayonnements peuven...  
Il présente un avantage pratique du fait que la radioprotection peut être considérée en soi sans qu’on ait connaissance des doses de rayonnement précédentes (p. ex., par suite d’examens médicaux ou de la présence de radon dans les maisons).
For very low doses, like we are exposed to every day from nature, or from dental X-rays, airplane flights, or working near radiation like nuclear medicine and nuclear power stations (i.e. doses below 100 mSv), it is not possible to determine from A-bomb survivor data what the relationships are between radiation dose and cancer. However, just to be safe, the approach for protection purposes assumes all radiation can be detrimental and should be avoided or kept to levels “as low as reasonably achievable” (ALARA).
  Fiches d'information  
MENTIONNONS AUSSI L�UTILISATION DES RAYONNEMENTS DANS L�INDUSTRIE, PAR EXEMPLE POUR LA RADIOGRAPHIE ET LA ST�RILISATION D�INSTRUMENTS M�DICAUX, LES RETOMB�ES DES ESSAIS NUCL�AIRES EFFECTU�S AU COURS DES ANN�ES 1950 � 1970 ET LES CENTRALES NUCL�AIRES. NOUS NE PRENONS PAS EN COMPTE ICI LES FORTES DOSES DE RAYONNEMENTS UTILIS�ES POUR TRAITER LE CANCER.
THERE ARE ALSO MANY MAN-MADE SOURCES OF IONIZING RADIATION, THE LARGEST BEING X-RAYS AND RADIOISOTOPES USED IN MEDICAL DIAGNOSTICS. OTHERS INCLUDE: RADIATION SOURCES USED IN INDUSTRY FOR SUCH PURPOSES AS RADIOGRAPHY AND STERILIZATION OF MEDICAL INSTRUMENTS; THE REMAINING FALL OUT FROM NUCLEAR WEAPONS TESTING FROM THE 1950S TO 1970S; NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS. HIGH RADIATION DOSES ARE GIVEN DELIBERATELY FOR THE TREATMENT OF CANCER BUT THESE ARE NOT CONSIDERED HERE. TABLE 2 GIVES SOME TYPICAL DOSES FROM THESE SOURCES.
  Fiches d'information  
MENTIONNONS AUSSI L�UTILISATION DES RAYONNEMENTS DANS L�INDUSTRIE, PAR EXEMPLE POUR LA RADIOGRAPHIE ET LA ST�RILISATION D�INSTRUMENTS M�DICAUX, LES RETOMB�ES DES ESSAIS NUCL�AIRES EFFECTU�S AU COURS DES ANN�ES 1950 � 1970 ET LES CENTRALES NUCL�AIRES. NOUS NE PRENONS PAS EN COMPTE ICI LES FORTES DOSES DE RAYONNEMENTS UTILIS�ES POUR TRAITER LE CANCER.
THERE ARE ALSO MANY MAN-MADE SOURCES OF IONIZING RADIATION, THE LARGEST BEING X-RAYS AND RADIOISOTOPES USED IN MEDICAL DIAGNOSTICS. OTHERS INCLUDE: RADIATION SOURCES USED IN INDUSTRY FOR SUCH PURPOSES AS RADIOGRAPHY AND STERILIZATION OF MEDICAL INSTRUMENTS; THE REMAINING FALL OUT FROM NUCLEAR WEAPONS TESTING FROM THE 1950S TO 1970S; NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS. HIGH RADIATION DOSES ARE GIVEN DELIBERATELY FOR THE TREATMENT OF CANCER BUT THESE ARE NOT CONSIDERED HERE. TABLE 2 GIVES SOME TYPICAL DOSES FROM THESE SOURCES.
  Commission canadienne d...  
La CCSN a publié plusieurs règlements portant sur les réacteurs nucléaires, les mines d’uranium, l’utilisation des matières radioactives, les déchets radioactifs et d’autres activités connexes. Une série de règlements de base, qui s’appliquent à toutes les activités, établit les doses de rayonnement maximales que les travailleurs et la population peuvent recevoir.
The CNSC has issued a number of regulations dealing with nuclear reactors, uranium mines, the use of radioactive materials, radioactive waste and other related activities. A fundamental set of regulations, which applies to all activities, defines the maximum radiation doses that workers and members of the public may receive. The values are based on the recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), an international, non-governmental organization of scientists from around the world. Almost all countries follow the recommendations of the ICRP for radiation protection standards.
  Fiches d'information  
Les rayons X, qui sont tr�s �nerg�tiques, les faisceaux d�acc�l�rateur et les rayons gamma �mis par le cobalt 60 sont utilis�s pour traiter le cancer. Dans ce cas, on bombarde la tumeur au moyen de fortes doses de rayonnement, tout en �vitant le plus possible les tissus sains avoisinants.
Most of the radiation we receive comes from natural sources. These include cosmic rays from space and naturally occurring radioactive elements. The largest source is from radon, a gaseous radioactive daughter product from the decay of radium. Radon decays to solid radioactive particles which, if inhaled, can remain in our lungs or respiratory tracts. Since radium is present in many rocks, radon is very pervasive. Outside, radon is dispersed, but in buildings, the radon that comes from building materials or from the surrounding earth can accumulate to significant levels.
  Rayons gamma  
Ces rayons peuvent interagir avec les cellules ou l’ADN et causer des lésions cellulaires. Nous recevons tous régulièrement des doses de rayonnement gamma d’origine naturelle (p. ex., la désintégration radioactive), mais il faut limiter l’exposition à ces rayons.
Gamma rays are the most penetrating of all of the forms of radiation. Gamma rays can be absorbed by denser materials (notice the blacker areas in the photo above), while passing through less dense materials. Gamma rays can interact with cells and DNA causing cell damage. While we all receive regular doses of gamma radiation from naturally occurring processes (such as radioactive decay), exposure to gamma radiation should be limited.
  Fiches d'information  
Pour am�liorer la production agricole, il est possible d'�liminer les insectes nuisibles en st�rilisant les m�les par rayonnement. Selon cette technique, on place les insectes m�les dans un conteneur blind� pour les st�riliser au moyen d'un radio-isotope (cobalt 60 ou c�sium 137) �mettant de faibles doses de rayons gamma.
To improve agricultural production, harmful insects can be eliminated by using radiation to sterilize the males of the species. In this process, male insects are placed in a shielded container containing a gamma ray emitting a radioactive isotope of either cobalt-60 or cesium-137. While in the chamber, low doses of gamma radiation sexually sterilize the insects. The sterilized insects produce no offspring, effectively controlling the population.
  Les rayonnements peuven...  
En l’absence de données prouvant véritablement l’existence d’effets nocifs ou bénéfiques à faible dose, et compte tenu du coefficient de risque susmentionné et scientifiquement reconnu, rien ne justifie que l’on essaie d’évaluer l’augmentation du nombre de cas de cancer dans une population ayant reçu des doses de rayonnement un peu plus élevées.
Whether there are harmful or beneficial effects from small increases in radiation dose above our normal background levels, any such effects are very small, may well be zero, and are lost in impacts of everyday living.
  Fiches d'information  
Les r�glements adopt�s dans tous les pays industrialis�s font en sorte que les doses de rayonnement d�origine artificielle re�ues par la population ou les travailleurs soient tr�s faibles. Au Canada, la dose maximale admissible pour la population attribuable � toute activit� nucl�aire est de 1 mSv par an.
Regulations in all developed nations ensure that the radiation dose received by the public or workers from manmade sources is very small. In Canada, the maximum allowable dose to members of the public from any nuclear activity is 1 mSv per year. In practice, the actual dose is less than one-hundredth of that.
  Fiches d'information  
Tableau 1 - Doses de rayonnement habituelles d�origine naturelle (mSv/an)
TABLE 1 - Typical radiation doses from natural sources (mSv/yr)
  Fiches d'information  
Tableau 2 - Doses de rayonnement types d�origine artificielle (mSv/an)
Table 2 - Typical radiation doses from man-made sources (mSv/yr)
  Fiches d'information  
Comme pour beaucoup d�autres choses, l�effet des rayonnements varie selon la dose. Les tr�s fortes doses, de l�ordre de 5 000 mSv ou plus, peuvent �tre mortelles. Les doses plus faibles peuvent provoquer un cancer de nombreuses ann�es apr�s l�exposition.
Like many other things, the effect of radiation depends on the dose. Very large doses, in the order of 5,000 millisieverts or more, can be lethal. Smaller doses can produce cancer after many years. There is still uncertainty about the effect of very small doses such as we receive from man-made sources. In many locations in the world the dose of radiation from natural sources is many times that of the average given above; yet there is no evidence that the people living in those areas have any increased rate of cancer or other undesirable effects. Recent research in Japan and France has shown that small doses of radiation can be beneficial in the treatment of disease.
  Les rayonnements peuven...  
Cependant, notre connaissance de la génétique, de la biochimie et des phénomènes en cause dans la formation d’un cancer s’améliore chaque jour et les scientifiques continueront de recueillir des données qui nous en apprendront davantage sur les effets des faibles doses.
There is dissent on the appropriateness of the LNT model, however, in both directions, and advocates of the conflicting positions can point to experimental data in support of their claims. The suggestion that the LNT model under-estimates the actual risk is based on some selected data from population studies (childhood leukemia from nuclear test fallout) and on experimental observations that some animal cells that are close to a cell that has been hit by radiation appear to be genetically affected even though they have not been hit. (This is called the “bystander” effect.) However, this suggestion is generally regarded by radiobiologists and epidemiologists as having no sound scientific basis. There is the view that there is a threshold below which radiation doses have no harmful effect. There is also the view that some increases in radiation exposure have a beneficial effect on health. Even with the much more extensive data now available than was the case when the LNT model was first adopted, it is still not possible to determine unequivocally whether there is or there is not an increased risk of cancer at a doses of a few tens of mSv.
  Les rayonnements peuven...  
Les effets nocifs de doses élevées de rayonnement sur la santé sont bien documentés. À vrai dire, l’efficacité de la radiothérapie repose sur le fait que les rayonnements tuent les cellules cancéreuses.
All living organisms have evolved and exist in the presence of ionizing radiation. Consequently, it is logical to expect that organisms have “learnt” or “adapted” to cope with the damaging effects of ionizing radiation and, indeed, biological processes have been found that do repair damage to cellular constituents like that caused by overexposure to potentially toxic agents like ionizing radiation. One can press this idea further and ask whether the stimulation of such repair processes results in the organism being able to cope better with other subsequent potentially toxic agents. This can include further radiation exposure, or other completely different agents including heat, metals, and chemicals. This type of effect has actually been observed in many studies with micro-organisms, plants and animals. One could even ask whether such stimulation has become an essential feature of life and that without it, organisms will not be as healthy and, further, that a little more ionizing radiation might have a beneficial effect on the life of an organism – in other words, a “hormetic” effect (from “hormesis” – a well-known effect where low doses of common toxins, like arsenic, are good for you but high doses aren’t). There is certainly evidence for all these effects from particular radiation experiments with animals. The question is to what extent they may be generally applicable to humans.
  Les rayonnements peuven...  
Les effets nocifs de doses élevées de rayonnement sur la santé sont bien documentés. À vrai dire, l’efficacité de la radiothérapie repose sur le fait que les rayonnements tuent les cellules cancéreuses.
All living organisms have evolved and exist in the presence of ionizing radiation. Consequently, it is logical to expect that organisms have “learnt” or “adapted” to cope with the damaging effects of ionizing radiation and, indeed, biological processes have been found that do repair damage to cellular constituents like that caused by overexposure to potentially toxic agents like ionizing radiation. One can press this idea further and ask whether the stimulation of such repair processes results in the organism being able to cope better with other subsequent potentially toxic agents. This can include further radiation exposure, or other completely different agents including heat, metals, and chemicals. This type of effect has actually been observed in many studies with micro-organisms, plants and animals. One could even ask whether such stimulation has become an essential feature of life and that without it, organisms will not be as healthy and, further, that a little more ionizing radiation might have a beneficial effect on the life of an organism – in other words, a “hormetic” effect (from “hormesis” – a well-known effect where low doses of common toxins, like arsenic, are good for you but high doses aren’t). There is certainly evidence for all these effects from particular radiation experiments with animals. The question is to what extent they may be generally applicable to humans.
  Les rayonnements peuven...  
Cependant, notre connaissance de la génétique, de la biochimie et des phénomènes en cause dans la formation d’un cancer s’améliore chaque jour et les scientifiques continueront de recueillir des données qui nous en apprendront davantage sur les effets des faibles doses.
There is dissent on the appropriateness of the LNT model, however, in both directions, and advocates of the conflicting positions can point to experimental data in support of their claims. The suggestion that the LNT model under-estimates the actual risk is based on some selected data from population studies (childhood leukemia from nuclear test fallout) and on experimental observations that some animal cells that are close to a cell that has been hit by radiation appear to be genetically affected even though they have not been hit. (This is called the “bystander” effect.) However, this suggestion is generally regarded by radiobiologists and epidemiologists as having no sound scientific basis. There is the view that there is a threshold below which radiation doses have no harmful effect. There is also the view that some increases in radiation exposure have a beneficial effect on health. Even with the much more extensive data now available than was the case when the LNT model was first adopted, it is still not possible to determine unequivocally whether there is or there is not an increased risk of cancer at a doses of a few tens of mSv.
  Les rayonnements peuven...  
Cependant, notre connaissance de la génétique, de la biochimie et des phénomènes en cause dans la formation d’un cancer s’améliore chaque jour et les scientifiques continueront de recueillir des données qui nous en apprendront davantage sur les effets des faibles doses.
There is dissent on the appropriateness of the LNT model, however, in both directions, and advocates of the conflicting positions can point to experimental data in support of their claims. The suggestion that the LNT model under-estimates the actual risk is based on some selected data from population studies (childhood leukemia from nuclear test fallout) and on experimental observations that some animal cells that are close to a cell that has been hit by radiation appear to be genetically affected even though they have not been hit. (This is called the “bystander” effect.) However, this suggestion is generally regarded by radiobiologists and epidemiologists as having no sound scientific basis. There is the view that there is a threshold below which radiation doses have no harmful effect. There is also the view that some increases in radiation exposure have a beneficial effect on health. Even with the much more extensive data now available than was the case when the LNT model was first adopted, it is still not possible to determine unequivocally whether there is or there is not an increased risk of cancer at a doses of a few tens of mSv.
  Les rayonnements peuven...  
Les effets nocifs de doses élevées de rayonnement sur la santé sont bien documentés. À vrai dire, l’efficacité de la radiothérapie repose sur le fait que les rayonnements tuent les cellules cancéreuses.
All living organisms have evolved and exist in the presence of ionizing radiation. Consequently, it is logical to expect that organisms have “learnt” or “adapted” to cope with the damaging effects of ionizing radiation and, indeed, biological processes have been found that do repair damage to cellular constituents like that caused by overexposure to potentially toxic agents like ionizing radiation. One can press this idea further and ask whether the stimulation of such repair processes results in the organism being able to cope better with other subsequent potentially toxic agents. This can include further radiation exposure, or other completely different agents including heat, metals, and chemicals. This type of effect has actually been observed in many studies with micro-organisms, plants and animals. One could even ask whether such stimulation has become an essential feature of life and that without it, organisms will not be as healthy and, further, that a little more ionizing radiation might have a beneficial effect on the life of an organism – in other words, a “hormetic” effect (from “hormesis” – a well-known effect where low doses of common toxins, like arsenic, are good for you but high doses aren’t). There is certainly evidence for all these effects from particular radiation experiments with animals. The question is to what extent they may be generally applicable to humans.