[Ditto]

bump

[chimera]

So you have about 58 minutes' worth of LLE from the use of nuclear energy. Well, I suppose in 58 minutes one could conceivably make an additional useful contribution to one's life work, but for most of us, an hour either way probably won't make much difference (of course, this does not make appeal to religious issues, such as the receiving of Viaticum or Extreme Unction, wherein 58 minutes might make a difference).

I would like to see Cohen or someone else analyze the gain in life expectancy by means of avoided risk. For example, if a non-polluting source of energy like nuclear could displace a given amount of pollutants introduced to the biosphere from a polluting source, what would be the gain in life expectancy among the general populace? This would be interesting because the risk from a nuclear accidents, for example, tends to be very localized, whereas widespread environmental effects from air and water contamination from carbon-based fuels results in a distributed risk.

[.30Carbine]

3) Liberals

2) Democrats

1) Ted Kennedy

( ;

[petuniasevan]

Eat Well, Stay Fit, Die Anyway!

[petuniasevan]

In a rational society, the low risks shown in the bottom group should receive little consideration,
but the public's attention is determined more by media coverage than by results of scientific risk analysis

This is a very serious problem today. The sheeple always listen to Chicken Little. Their thinking is done for them.

The magnetic field flap is a case in point. Really, now. Your cell phone won't divert your compass from magnetic north, will it? No.
Neither will your microwave (remember that "scare du jour")? In fact, we all live within the Earth's fairly strong magnetic field.
But of course the sheeple will never do their own research or *GASP* use common sense.
Public education works! Just don't ask who are the beneficiaries.

[altair]

Nice article. Bookmark bump.