No... Alpha would be especially bad.
Radiation and the Cookie Test - https://letstalkaboutscience.wordpress.com/2013/03/15/radiat...
> So if we are concerned about radiation safety, how do we treat different sources of ionizing radiation? The cleverest way I’ve heard it summed up is by the ‘cookie test’: imagine that you have four cookies. One is an alpha emitter, one is a beta emitter, one is a gamma emitter, and one is a neutron emitter. You can throw one cookie away, but you have to put one in your pocket, hold one in your hand, and eat one. How do you pick which cookies to do what with?
And for a real world case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_of_Alexander_Litvine...
> Unlike most common radiation sources, polonium-210 emits very little gamma radiation (the low-intensity gamma ray at an energy of 803 keV is the most prominent), but large amounts of alpha particles which do not penetrate even a sheet of paper or the epidermis of human skin, and is therefore relatively invisible to common radiation detectors such as Geiger counters. This explained why tests conducted by doctors and Scotland Yard at the hospital with Geiger counters were negative. Both gamma rays and alpha particles are classified as ionizing radiation, which can cause radiation damage. An alpha-emitting substance can cause significant damage only if ingested or inhaled, acting on living cells like a short-range weapon. Hours before his death, Litvinenko was tested for alpha-emitters using special equipment.