Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Odd Job
@ The Reaper
X-ray imaging is relatively inexpensive and I'm willing to bet that any trauma surgeon in good standing with his imaging department colleagues will be able to get it done with the minimum of fuss. CT scans with reconstructions is a different matter: the scans can be done quickly enough and without much planning, but he will need to get a friendly technologist to produce measurements and recons on the separate workstation.
In 2003 I conducted a similar test to what I propose Dr Vail does, but my test was to see whather I could determine certain forensic properties of a projectile that could not be removed from the patient. It involved plain films and CTs, but done in such a way that the meat was not handled or manipulated from one exam to the next. Here are some attached pictures, the first one showing a plain film setup and the second one showing a CT setup, in both cases mounted on a homemade jig (my design).
The plain film X-raying in my case was more complex than what Dr Vail needs because certain distances and equipment variables had to be documented before the exposure. However a setup like this for Dr Vail's pupose would allow dual plane imaging of a piece of meat within two minutes, even using conventional film processing. (Three plane imaging is possible if the metallic clamps are substituted for plastic ties). Plain film costs would be modest: you need several boxes of film costing a few hundred dollars and then you need to pay an X-ray technologist/radiographer a day's wage to X-ray those in two planes. Even if you were paying him the top end of an agency scale for radiography, the amount would be somewhere around $350. It would certainly be a lot less than Dr Vail could charge for private consulting 
CTs: you would be able to scan all your blocks within one afternoon, provided you had them all on a trolley with dowel rods already in situ. The X-ray tech fee might be a bit more (or it might be a lot less depending on Dr Vail's contacts) but there would be no film costs. They would burn those images onto DICOM discs as a record and export the studies to the 3D workstation for manipulation. By the time you had the CTs you would be able to work out whether there was sufficient consistency to warrant producing 3D wound tracks, or not. So I guess what I'm telling you is that the imaging is not that expensive. Nobody helped me financially when I did my research involving this imaging and I am but one man.
The second issue is to do with the composition of the Le Mas bullets and the comparison to the formula for Coca-Cola.
Well, that is not an accurate analogy because if necessary the Le Mas projectiles could be dismantled and subjected to any number of metallurgical analytical testing and the components would be found. It would however be a matter of good faith for the company to just tell us in the first place what the components are. This is not the same as asking for the technique by which they are made. It is just a matter of courtesy and it is needed for the X-ray analysis. For example in the days when Winchester was making 7.65mm Silvertips with aluminium jacketing, any test like this would have been conducted with the premise that this jacketing would be radiolucent. In a similar vein, with regards to the lead content in a projectile, clinicians may be interested at a later stage to know whether a projectile may pose a plumbism risk in certain circumstances. There are aspects to do with radiological density and projectile recognition too.
I cannot entertain further claims that the components are a secret. If this was a new hair dye or a cooking recipe I would understand but that clearly is not the case. |
OJ:
Agreed on the utility of the X-Rays, though wheeling a dead hog or 20 into the Radiology Department might raise a few eyebrows.
If not knowing what the bullets are made of is a show stopper for you, and LeMas does not wish to share that info, they cannot be forced to, so I guess that this is the end of the line for your participation.
As far as concerns of plumbism, I think that ballistic lead poisoning is almost always harmful. Over the long term, I would have to ask a physician how the body treats embedded objects. I would think that would not be a concern at this stage of testing, as the standard issue M855 and Mk 262 bullets have lead cores, so if it were possible to survive a hit from the the LeMas, any fragments remaining would be treated like any other bullet fragments.
If you cannot entertain the failure to provide the composition of the bullets, sorry that you feel that strongly about it, Sir, enjoyed the informed discussion up to this point.
If you still want to see the X-Rays, let me know so that I do not waste my time looking for them.
TR