Posted on 04/02/2011 12:57:12 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
I’m sorry — are you saying that calex59 ever claimed there was NO radiation? Do you have a quote from ANY freeper who ever said there was NO radiation?
I’ve read most of the threads, and I’ve never seen even the most pollyana Freeper claim there was no radiation.
Yes. That is why we put lead on getting x-rays, and the workers go into another room. That’s why they set radiation levels so low at power plants and other places where radiation is held.
That’s why we put expensive systems in our houses to remove radon (my house has a radon extraction system because of the natural radon levels).
But it doesn’t seem to keep people from flying commercially, even though that increases your radiation exposure and increases your risk. Or keep people from basements of large buildings where radiation is higher, or from living anywhere with higher-than-minimal background radiation.
It fortunately doesn’t keep us from mining coal, even though it exposes them to higher radiation levels; or burning coal which slightly increases background radiation levels.
When we say there is “nothing to fear” from radiation, it is meant in the same manner as saying there is “nothing to fear” from flying, even though in addition to increased radiation, planes do occasionally crash, and usually kill everybody when they do. Or saying there is “nothing to fear” from driving, which kills tens of thousands of people, or “nothing to fear” from junk food, even though junk food can clearly damage our health.
Nobody lives their lives to minimize risk; you might as well put a bullet in your head, because you’d have no life. We manage risk/reward.
But, you may, if you like, worry about those stray gamma rays. Which, by the way, exist naturally, and could hit you while you are reading this very post.
Next time you read something, try to understand it, maybe a course in reading comprehension would help you.
As for the "sky is falling" FReepers, they were wrong and are still wrong. The fact that this facility came through an earthquake and a tidal wave, far in excess of what it was built to withstand, says a very good thing about nukes.
Also the safety record of nukes is excellent. 3 Mile Island was over blown and there has only been one Chernobyl. So far in Japan there have been no deaths from radiation and most likely there will not be any. There certainly won't be any deaths, or even sickness, in the USA because of this incident.
I didn't see any Freepers claim there was not a serious problem at the plant. But let's take note: there's no killer cloud of radiation over Los Angeles. You didn't need your iodide tablets or years supply of MREs in the backyard fallout shelter. There's still nothing to get worked up over if you're 5,000 miles away in the U.S.
If you're in northeast Japan, that's a different story. Risk is entirely related to proximity. It's a fact and hasn't changed from what the calm Freepers always said.
I was, and still I am, disappointed in the quality of reporting in the West on the situation. Three weeks ago it was chicken little nonsense from ignorant, alarmist, ratings-hungry reporters.
I already looked into the call for volunteers. Unfortunately I was not a match for the criteria: 1. working in the nuclear industry 2. current passport 3. have a family willing to let you travel there.
Pray. Donate. Mind the mess here at home; hold officials' feet to the fire.
Sorry about the last comment, It was not aimed at you:)
Is this a safe plant?
http://www.wltx.com/news/national/article/130536/142/SoCal-Nuclear-Plants-Safety-Questioned
Why the need to falsify safety reports?
“I already looked into the call for volunteers. Unfortunately I was not a match for the criteria: 1. working in the nuclear industry 2. current passport 3. have a family willing to let you travel there.”
Get a passport. You make your own decisions.
Tell your family there is NOTHING to fear from radiation AND NO ONE IS GOING TO DIE. THERE IS NO RADIATION RISK>>EVERYTHING IS FINE..YOU CAN BE EXPOSED TO THAT TRENCH WATER WITH NO PROBLEM...YOU CAN EAT RADIOACTIVE SEAFOOD, YOU CAN SWIM IN THE OCEAN 40 KILOMETERS AWAY..ahem..fly over and volunteer.
If you show up someone will put you to use. Volunteer to take food into the hot zone.
If nothing else, you can help pick up the dead bodies filled with radiation
“I already looked into the call for volunteers. Unfortunately I was not a match for the criteria: 1. working in the nuclear industry 2. current passport 3. have a family willing to let you travel there.”
Get a passport. You make your own decisions.
Tell your family there is NOTHING to fear from radiation AND NO ONE IS GOING TO DIE. THERE IS NO RADIATION RISK>>EVERYTHING IS FINE..YOU CAN BE EXPOSED TO THAT TRENCH WATER WITH NO PROBLEM...YOU CAN EAT RADIOACTIVE SEAFOOD, YOU CAN SWIM IN THE OCEAN 40 KILOMETERS AWAY..ahem..fly over and volunteer.
If you show up someone will put you to use. Volunteer to take food into the hot zone.
If nothing else, you can help pick up the dead bodies filled with radiation
The bad news is that, if you get a dose in the meantime, it concentrates very readily in the thyroid, where it tends to cause thyroid cancer. (I think I may lay off the miso soup [contains seaweed, which concentrates iodine] for a few months.)
The real bad actors are cesium-137 and strontium-90. Both have halflives around 30 years, short enough to emit a lot of decay energy and long enough so that they don't go away for several human lifetimes. Cs-137 is a potent gamma emitter, but doesn't stay in tissue very long. Sr-90 is not a gamma emitter, but mimics calcium in the body, so it accumulates in bone, where it causes bone cancer and leukemia. High levels of Cs-137 are the main reason the "dead zone" around Chernobyl remains closed.
I find it particularly ironic that many are believing the mainstream media BS. This is the same media that put the worthless POS communist kenyan punk in the White House. This is the same media that routinely takes the side of the union thugs in Wisconsin, that won’t present a full quote from a Republican unless it’s laced with liberal double-speak, that sees no problem with our government’s policy to borrow many multiples of our GDP (and to borrow from COMMUNIST CHINA), that sees no problem with the invasion of Mexicans into our country - well, y’all get the picture. If they can’t tell the truth about anything else, why would you expect a bunch of journalists to be able to discern accurate information about something even minutely technical?
These people have an agenda and many of y’all are falling for it. I can fully understand now how so many were duped into voting for Obama.
Just wanted to say I do not think it's a good thing to downplay a crisis and claim it's much smaller than Three Mile Island.But that's our fault for believing those who were saying it.
You see, many of us are pro-nuke (I am) and we do hear a lot of the doom and gloom from the anti-nuke libs we debate in other forums. We also want to downplay their claims to what is reality. They make such claims as "people in Japan will get cancer" or "possible nuclear fall-out coming to the westcoast" because they want to scare people. They use the crisis as a recruiting tool to increase their anti-nuclear energy agenda. We use the information we get to make them look stupid and defend nuclear energy. If we get wrong info then we lose credibility. Personally I stay out of such debates with libs for lack of knowledge on the subject but others have not and now they have egg on their face.
I'm not going to spend time to go back and look for all the replies to those concerned including to a couple of Americans in Japan where they were told that because of the types of plants they could never reach the level of crisis of Three Mile Island and the addition of a condescending remark at the end of the comments.
It's one thing to reply to a concerned Freeper with "I don't think this will reach the level of Three Mile Island" and it's another to spew insults to those who are just curious and asking questions because they figured those talking about the issue may know much more than what they hear on the MSM and what to they get for an answer?
"There's no way this could ever even reach the level of Three Mile Island so you you may want to turn off the TV get out of your lead coveralls and go to sleep now."
And you know that had been happening.
I think we're all basically on the same team and nobody in Free Republic is an idiot and we should not be insulting them because they may be new here and tilting towards voting our way. We don't need to be insulting to disagree.
This is an interesting discussion on cancer
http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=480200&page=159
“Sorry, as this is my forte, I have to interject here. Double strand breaks ARE repairable. It is more complex, requires more energy, and correct conditions (terrain) but it can be done. Generally by non-homologous end joining. Also free radicals are not always oxygen; they say free radicals ‘oxidize’ if they go through a redox reaction. It is called “oxidation” because oxygen is one of the most reactive and efficient at this (and probably the first element to be studied involving these reactions). ROS contain oxygen, but “free radicals” as a general term, do not have to. Free radicals are pretty much any ion that causes a redox reaction outside of the homeostatic redox reactions for normal body processes. But, our bodies use ions or “radicals” daily for redox signaling, repairing DNA, etc. Basically, it all depends on the terrain, as to whether your body develops cancer as a result of exposure to ionizing radiation (i.e. how much of those antioxidants are available for your body to neutralize the the FR or ROS). Of course, there are instances where the body has been over-assaulted where it cannot make up the difference of repair to damage, and in that case cell death is the result. (Edit: there are also cases where DNA repair is incorrect, the mitotic check points are compromised, and cancer can develop as a result)
Hope that helps!
“You can develop cancer if only one side is compromised. In transcription, only one side of the DNA is used, called the template strand. If this strand has one or more base pair substitutions/deletions/etc., it could code for the wrong amino, making an incorrect protein (proteins are the major regulatory mechanism of cells). Also if a start or stop codon is compromised, you could have an incorrect protein made as well. Lentiviruses work in this manner to cause cancer as well. If they incorporate into the DNA in the right area (which for unknown reasons, viruses will incorporate themselves into active genes) , they can cause cancer to develop as a result. “
A lot of people who do not smoke get lung cancer.
You can’t say that smoking doesn’t cause cancer because a lot of people dont get cancer from it.
Same is true with radiation.
I REJECT EVERYONE who comes on these threads and claims that the workers at that Nuke Plant are safe right now and nothing is going to happen to them in terms of their health.
They dont even have proper gear or dosimeters.
Correction:
'Expert' Freeper: “The world is going to end tomorrow” (used as a sacrcastic and condecending remark to a Freeper's simple question about what they may have heard on the MSM.)
I can honestly say I had never heard any concerned Freeper with a question serously thinking the world was going to end tomorrow but YOU ARE RIGHT... that statement had posted several times and you know it was a famous reply to an honest question.
Yeah, I figured that. No problem.
Tell yo what; Just for you I’m gonna save the world!
Wait a minute....................
There - all done the world is safe
didn’t even have to leave my rocking chair.
Maybe tomorrow I’ll prop up the sky! You know... to keep it from falling
That's a far cry from insisting that there's no radiation -- meaning there's nothing wrong. One can "downplay" the incident relative to a specific claim; if someone says it's worse than chernobyl, then you would "downplay" it by saying it wasn't.
"There's no way this could ever even reach the level of Three Mile Island so you you may want to turn off the TV get out of your lead coveralls and go to sleep now."
I don't know why anybody would say that -- it was already worse than 3-mile island pretty much from the get-go, in some ways, and definitely after the building outer shells started blowing off.
Of course, three-mile-island wasn't all that severe from a long-term percspective, so almost any accident would have to be bigger, if it's releasing any significant radiation.
Reactor 2 still has it’s building basically intact, so it is retaining heat. I’m guessing if the roof blew off, it would look cooler.
That picture is from the Greenpeace site - which I always think of the Seinfeld episode when I think of Greenpeace.
Here is the google translation of the discussion of that picture
“But we first consider the infrared images. The reactor blocks are numbered on the photographs of one to four. The reactor 1, we see heat sources scattered. According to the Nuclear expert John Large, this could be destroyed fuel assemblies, which are in the fuel pool. In contrast, in reactor 2 is an even heat dissipation over the entire roof of the building. In this reactor is the second catch basin was flooded with water and transfers the heat evenly to the structure of the building.
In reactor 3, the heat is very diffuse and the individual heat sources are spread throughout the building. If it is left to the cooling pond is, after evaluation of our experts, the pool probably dry or drained the water, at least in part. The distributed over the building heat sources can also fear that was heavily damaged in the explosion of hydrogen not only the building, but the single “chunk” of the fuel elements have spread in the building
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.