I always thought she was an idiot. This only proves what I thought all along.
Was she wrong? You should start with that.
I wouldn’t say idiot. She knows how to use the press to make big money. Is she to be taken seriously? No way. She is an entertainer. I do agree with her that the current crop of GOP candidates will lose to Zero.
Here is a copy of Ann Coulter’s original article entitled:
A GLOWING REPORT ON RADIATION
http://staugustine.com/opinions/2011-03-20/coulter-glowing-report-radiation
EXCERPT :
A $10 million Department of Energy study from 1991 examined 10 years of epidemiological research by the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health on 700,000 shipyard workers, some of whom had been exposed to 10 times more radiation than the others from their work on the ships’ nuclear reactors. The workers exposed to excess radiation had a 24 percent lower death rate and a 25 percent lower cancer mortality than the non-irradiated workers.
Isn’t that just incredible? I mean, that the Department of Energy spent $10 million doing something useful? Amazing, right?
In 1983, a series of apartment buildings in Taiwan were accidentally constructed with massive amounts of cobalt 60, a radioactive substance. After 16 years, the buildings’ 10,000 occupants developed only five cases of cancer. The cancer rate for the same age group in the general Taiwanese population over that time period predicted 170 cancers.
The people in those buildings had been exposed to radiation nearly five times the maximum “safe” level according to the U.S. government. But they ended up with a cancer rate 96 percent lower than the general population.
Bernard L. Cohen, a physics professor at the University of Pittsburgh, compared radon exposure and lung cancer rates in 1,729 counties covering 90 percent of the U.S. population. His study in the 1990s found far fewer cases of lung cancer in those counties with the highest amounts of radon — a correlation that could not be explained by smoking rates.
Tom Bethell, author of the “Politically Incorrect Guide to Science,” has been writing for years about the beneficial effects of some radiation, or “hormesis.” A few years ago, he reported on a group of scientists who concluded their conference on hormesis at the University of Massachusetts by repairing to a spa in Boulder, Mont., specifically in order to expose themselves to excess radiation.
At the Free Enterprise Radon Health Mine in Boulder, people pay $5 to descend 85 feet into an old mining pit to be irradiated with more than 400 times the EPA-recommended level of radon. In the summer, 50 people a day visit the mine hoping for relief from chronic pain and autoimmune disorders.
Amazingly, even the Soviet-engineered disaster at Chernobyl in 1986 can be directly blamed for the deaths of no more than the 31 people inside the plant who died in the explosion. Although news reports generally claimed a few thousand people died as a result of Chernobyl — far fewer than the tens of thousands initially predicted — that hasn’t been confirmed by studies.
Indeed, after endless investigations, including by the United Nations, Manhattan Project veteran Theodore Rockwell summarized the reports to Bethell in 2002, saying, “They have not yet reported any deaths outside of the 30 who died in the plant.”
Even the thyroid cancers in people who lived near the reactor were attributed to low iodine in the Russian diet — and consequently had no effect on the cancer rate.
Meanwhile, the animals around the Chernobyl reactor, who were not evacuated, are “thriving,” according to scientists quoted in the April 28, 2002 Sunday Times (UK).
CLICK ABOVE LINK FOR THE REST OF HER ARTICLE.
She has jumped the shark.
I wouldn't be so quick to call her names. Take some time to read about Radiation Hormesis. There are dozens of studies from around the world indicating that she may be absolutly correct on this.
At least as of my college chemistry class over 50 years ago, all metals are poison. But, as Coulter pointed out, people take pills to ingest trace amounts of zinc and other metals. To improve their health.The reality is not only that "dosage makes the poison," but that what is poisonous in large doses may be beneficial in very small doses.It is surprising, I admit, that the latter should apply to radiation. But if that is what the data shows, it is arbitrary and capricious to reject the data in favor of the prejudice that "If one is good, two is better."
One may be good, yet two might actually be bad - and a hundred, deadly.