Acceptable uSv/hr measurement for vintage watches?

Posts
31
Likes
13
So I bought my first vintage omega a week ago and I'm worried a little about the radiation.

I know the risk is extremely minimal but my logic is that my health should not be jeopardized by my watch hobby.

So I have ordered a geiger counter that should be arriving in a few days.

What should be the acceptable uSv/hr measurement from the caseback if I plan on wearing the watch 5 days a week for 10 hours a day?
 
Posts
1,565
Likes
3,672
Depends on what you fear.

I wouldn't wear a watch with more than 10 microSv/h (so I guess your detector will measure the gamma rays emitted by the Radium lume) on the caseback.
 
Posts
1,443
Likes
3,810
Wonder why this issue is flaring up again? Last time it was Northampton study...
 
Posts
10,440
Likes
16,324
Wonder why this issue is flaring up again? Last time it was Northampton study...
It's not. It's the same person asking again.
 
Posts
13,198
Likes
22,952
If you're that concerned, have you considered selling it and buying a model with either tritium lume or no lume at all?
 
Posts
31
Likes
13
Depends on what you fear.

I wouldn't wear a watch with more than 10 microSv/h (so I guess your detector will measure the gamma rays emitted by the Radium lume) on the caseback.

Do you not realize that 10 microSV/h is quite a lot? You would literally be taking in radiation equivalent to taking two flights or 4 chest x-rays every day if you wore that watch for 8 hours... Is your watch hobby really that worth it?
 
Posts
1,565
Likes
3,672
Do you not realize that 10 microSV/h is quite a lot? You would literally be taking in radiation equivalent to taking two flights or 4 chest x-rays every day if you wore that watch for 8 hours... Is your watch hobby really that worth it?

Listen, I'm a nuclear engineer, I got a PhD in nuclear materials and presently a reasercher on nuclear fuels (I handle actinides dayly) so yes, I know what I'm talking about.
As the wrist (I guess you will wear your watch on your wrist) does not contain any so called "soft/vital" tissues (organ), the danger is really really limited.
Once more, I will say it again, I would be far more concerned by the chemicals in my environnement than by wearing a Radium watch (by the way, you did not even mention the radionucleid contained in your watch, I've guessed it's Radium... It could be Promethium but it's way too rare to mention it).

Regards

Dr. R.
Edited:
 
Posts
31
Likes
13
Ok I'm gonna be brutally honest here. I'm 22. I assume most of you guys here are 40+. If I was 40, I wouldn't worry about taking multiple xrays to my wrist every day. However, there are still blood vessels, blood, and nerves on your wrist. For me, if I keep doing that for the next 40 years, I'm gonna die from cancer by 60.
 
Posts
13,198
Likes
22,952
If you have concerns, legitimate or not, that's fine. But coming on here, asking a question, receiving answers from specialists in the field, then telling them they're wrong and spouting half baked alarmist nonsense isn't helping anyone.

You've received the informed answers you were looking for. Clearly your concerns remain so simply sell your current Seamaster and buy a post '62 model without radium.
 
Posts
1,071
Likes
2,167
Something fishy about this. Like maybe a <200 member who wants to sell a watch by getting people to offer to take it off his hands?
 
Posts
1,443
Likes
3,810
Ok I'm gonna be brutally honest here. I'm 22. I assume most of you guys here are 40+. If I was 40, I wouldn't worry about taking multiple xrays to my wrist every day. However, there are still blood vessels, blood, and nerves on your wrist. For me, if I keep doing that for the next 40 years, I'm gonna die from cancer by 60.

I’m gonna be brutally honest: I would consider apologizing for this remark. Your life is more valuable because you're 20? Do you know all our medical histories? No one is exempt from illness. Get out of here if you going to bring self-regarding concerns and then undervalue those same concerns if they are not in your privileged age group
 
Posts
10,440
Likes
16,324
This is but one of four posts he has made on the topic. He is trolling and post farming. Best to not engage as you only help with the race to 200 so he can sell a deadly lump of Uranium disguised as a watch. eBay must be shut.
 
Posts
356
Likes
1,325
Interestingly enough I actually checked a lot of my early radium watches yesterday - most were in single digits but a recently acquired JLC WWW from WW2 recorded 115 uSv/h. That measurement was directly on the crystal and when I measured the caseback and around 8" above the watch both readings dropped to 7.5 uSv/h. Those figures would not stop me wearing the watch but I would think twice about wearing it non-stop for a long period of time! That said I also measured a 40's Heuer that I had worn daily for around one year and that was measuring 10 uSv/h
 
Posts
1,565
Likes
3,672
Interestingly enough I actually checked a lot of my early radium watches yesterday - most were in single digits but a recently acquired JLC WWW from WW2 recorded 115 uSv/h. That measurement was directly on the crystal and when I measured the caseback and around 8" above the watch both readings dropped to 7.5 uSv/h. Those figures would not stop me wearing the watch but I would think twice about wearing it non-stop for a long period of time! That said I also measured a 40's Heuer that I had worn daily for around one year and that was measuring 10 uSv/h

115 µSv/h is a lot for a watch.
 
Posts
29,671
Likes
76,828
I get the OP's concern. For me it's not about comparing risks to some other risk, it's about managing the risks that I can manage. Because there may be some greater risk out there (like chemicals in the environment), doesn't diminish any of the other risks around me, so that logic fails completely.

If the watch makes you uncomfortable, then sell it or see if you can have it relumed.

Cheers, Al