igergs BEAR nee TiepmthAatdinls Jhapaeae UNCLASSIFIED™ weenA Seana ‘simulant. Further, as a basis for cumpariag the effe-ts of different types of simu- simulant. Further, asi1 basis for comparing the¢ effecofdifi tybility was compased to that of two previously studied fa}lout simulants, an oe‘quid aerosol and a mud-slurty serowl, The simulant was also administered allesrsii eviously?tad solubility was compared. to t ionic liquid aerosol and @ mud-slurry‘aerosol, The simolantwas by gavage to provide data on uptake offallout byingestion|assemper ‘witht inhale lants, the metabolic behavior of this dry-particle fallout simulant of limited - romt , ; i lants, the me! g fataed ) akeoffatloutby ingestion ascomparedwithinbala- by gavage to provide data.on uptake of fallout by ingestion as compared’witht hala evaluation was made of the ‘fadiation dore to individual frominhaledfalloat at;compared to the concomitant external radiation ioe that the animals would receive if exposed to the same airborne simulant. tion, From these data, anevaluation was madeof the radiation dose to individual tissues from inhaled fallout as compared to the concomitant external radiation dose that the animals would receive if exposed to the same airborne simulant. eat SS fang