We should stop running from Radiation

This Article was written by a Physicist Wade Allison of Oxford University. The doses will be alien to you but just compare them.

More than 10.000 People have died in the Japanese Tsunami and the survivors are cold and hungry. but the Media concentrate on Nuclear radiation from which no one has died - and is unlikely to.

Nuclear Radiation at very high levels is dangerous, but the scale of concern that it evokes is misplaced. Nuclear technology cures countless cancer patients every day and a radiation dose given for radiotherapy in hospital is no different in principle to a similar dose received in the environment.

What of three Mile Island ? There was no known deaths there.

And Chernobyl ? The latest UN report published on 28 February confirms the death toll - 28 fatalities among emergency workers, plus 15 fatal cases of child thyroid cancer- which would of been avoided if Iodine tablets had been taken (as they now have in Japan). And in each case the numbers are minute compared with the 3800 at Bhopal in 1984 who died as a result of a leak of Chemicals from the Union Carbide pesticide plant.

So what of the radioactivety released at Fukushima ? How does it compare with that at Chernobyl ? Lets look at the measured count rates. The highest rate reported T 1900 on 22 March,for any Japanese prefecture was 12 Bq per sq M (for the radioactive isotope of ceasium 137)

A map of Chernobyl in the UN report shows regions shaded according to rate, up to 3,700 KBq per sq M- areas with less than 37 kBq per sq m are not shaded at all. In round terms this suggests that the radioactive fallout at Fukushima is less than 1% of that at Chernobyl.

The other important radioisotope in fallout is iodine, which can cause child thyroid cancer

This is only produced when the reactor is on and quickly delays once the reactor shuts down (it has the half life of 8 days) The old fuel rods in storage at Fukushima, through radioactive contain no iodine.

But at Chernobyl the full inventory of Iodine and Cesium was released in the initial explosion, so that at Fukushima any release of iodine should be much less than 1% of that of Chernobyl _ with an effect reduced still further by iodine tablets.

Over reaction
On the 16 anniversary of Chernobyl, the Swedish radiation authorities admitted over reacting by setting the safety level to low and condemning 78% of all reindeer meat unnecessarily, and at great cost.

New attitude - People worry about Radiation because they cannot feel it however , nature has a solution - in recent years it has been found that living cells replace and mend themselves in various ways to recover from a dose of Radiation.

These clever mechanisms kick in within hours and rarely fail, except when they are overloaded as at Chernobyl where most of the emergency workers who received a dose greater than 4.000 MSv over a few hours died within weeks.

However patients receiving a coarse of radiotherapy usually get a dose of more than 20,000MSv to vital healthy tissue close to a treated tumour. This tissue survives only because the treatment is spread over many days giving healthy cells time for repair.

Modern reactors are better designed than those at Fukushima tomorrow's may be better still but we should not wait. Radioactive waste is nasty but the quantity is small, especially if re processed.
Some might ask whether i would accept it if it was buried 100 meters under my house ? My answer why not more generally , we should stop running away from Radiation.


This was only an extract but we should listen to this and stop beleiving the scare mungering

Your right Nukes, media scare mungering

good post

unfortunately nukes many people believe what they are told,be it news,newspapers or any form of media,when people dont know what to believe then media takes over

Im going to the Ukrane next week with a tour to Chernobyl

Im going to the Ukrane next week with a tour to Chernobyl

I would be interested to hear your view after your trip and any photos you take

Im going to the Ukrane next week with a tour to Chernobyl

i thought Chernobyl was quarenteend and only russian government or military was allowed to go in?

Im going to the Ukrane next week with a tour to Chernobyl

i thought Chernobyl was quarenteend and only russian government or military was allowed to go in?

Some parts are i believe. But others you can access but id imagine you could not get to close. Especially Pripriot which is uninhabitable due to the Contamination.

Im going to the Ukrane next week with a tour to Chernobyl

i thought Chernobyl was quarenteend and only russian government or military was allowed to go in?

Some parts are i believe. But others you can access but id imagine you could not get to close. Especially Pripriot which is uninhabitable due to the Contamination.

ah right, one of the nuclear plants in britain had a radiation leak and the media say that no one can go in it for 100 years!

bloody mad. Nuclear power, good energy source but VERY VERY dangerous

i thought Chernobyl was quarenteend and only russian government or military was allowed to go in?[/quote]
Some parts are i believe. But others you can access but id imagine you could not get to close. Especially Pripriot which is uninhabitable due to the Contamination.[/quote]

ah right, one of the nuclear plants in britain had a radiation leak and the media say that no one can go in it for 100 years!

bloody mad. Nuclear power, good energy source but VERY VERY dangerous [/quote]
I disagree Chief. The first reactors built they were always going to be a bit dodgy as they had never been built before. Yes there was an accident in the 50s i think Wind scale and i don't know the ins and outs but no Reactor core that has even been decommissioned would you be able to enter for an extremely long time. Once all the fuel has been taken out you will remove 99% of all the activity so the safest thing to do after is box it in and let it decay naturally.
New stations are very safe, the safety systems in use are superb . In terms of risk you are more likely to get killed by an UFO than a Nuclear accident.

i thought Chernobyl was quarenteend and only russian government or military was allowed to go in?

Some parts are i believe. But others you can access but id imagine you could not get to close. Especially Pripriot which is uninhabitable due to the Contamination.[/quote]

ah right, one of the nuclear plants in britain had a radiation leak and the media say that no one can go in it for 100 years!

bloody mad. Nuclear power, good energy source but VERY VERY dangerous [/quote]
I disagree Chief. The first reactors built they were always going to be a bit dodgy as they had never been built before. Yes there was an accident in the 50s i think Wind scale and i don't know the ins and outs but no Reactor core that has even been decommissioned would you be able to enter for an extremely long time. Once all the fuel has been taken out you will remove 99% of all the activity so the safest thing to do after is box it in and let it decay naturally.
New stations are very safe, the safety systems in use are superb . In terms of risk you are more likely to get killed by an UFO than a Nuclear accident.[/quote]

well aint gonna argue with you since this is your line of work

i thought Chernobyl was quarenteend and only russian government or military was allowed to go in?

Some parts are i believe. But others you can access but id imagine you could not get to close. Especially Pripriot which is uninhabitable due to the Contamination.

ah right, one of the nuclear plants in britain had a radiation leak and the media say that no one can go in it for 100 years!

bloody mad. Nuclear power, good energy source but VERY VERY dangerous [/quote]
I disagree Chief. The first reactors built they were always going to be a bit dodgy as they had never been built before. Yes there was an accident in the 50s i think Wind scale and i don't know the ins and outs but no Reactor core that has even been decommissioned would you be able to enter for an extremely long time. Once all the fuel has been taken out you will remove 99% of all the activity so the safest thing to do after is box it in and let it decay naturally.
New stations are very safe, the safety systems in use are superb . In terms of risk you are more likely to get killed by an UFO than a Nuclear accident.[/quote]

well aint gonna argue with you since this is your line of work [/quote]
You are all bloody boring. I get all fired up and no one will debate with me

fine then!

nukes you are completely wrong, i disagree with nuclear energy because if there was a meltdown or a leak the area would be screwed unless swiftly contained. Nuclear has also caused conflicts around the world and so nearly started a world war - Iran crying that we wouldnt let them, then the russians trying to look like good guys defending them.

your turn

fine then!

nukes you are completely wrong, i disagree with nuclear energy because if there was a meltdown or a leak the area would be screwed unless swiftly contained. Nuclear has also caused conflicts around the world and so nearly started a world war - Iran crying that we wouldnt let them, then the russians trying to look like good guys defending them.

your turn

OK Can we please build one of those in Swansea....PLEASE Sheriff

fine then!

nukes you are completely wrong, i disagree with nuclear energy because if there was a meltdown or a leak the area would be screwed unless swiftly contained. Nuclear has also caused conflicts around the world and so nearly started a world war - Iran crying that we wouldnt let them, then the russians trying to look like good guys defending them.

your turn

OK Can we please build one of those in Swansea....PLEASE Sheriff

if i ever become PM that could easily be arranged

[quote="Bridgend_bluebird"][quote="Nuclearblue"][quote="Bridgend_bluebird"]fine then!

nukes you are completely wrong, i disagree with nuclear energy because if there was a meltdown or a leak the area would be screwed unless swiftly contained. Nuclear has also caused conflicts around the world and so nearly started a world war And it also ended a War Chief Get in there Nukes - Iran crying that we wouldnt let them, then the russians trying to look like good guys defending them.

quote="Bridgend_bluebird"]

fine then!

nukes you are completely wrong, i disagree with nuclear energy because if there was a meltdown or a leak the area would be screwed unless swiftly contained. Nuclear has also caused conflicts around the world and so nearly started a world war And it also ended a War Chief Get in there Nukes - Iran crying that we wouldnt let them, then the russians trying to look like good guys defending them.

[/quote]

only cause russia are all mouth and no action (like me ) who think they are the dogs bollocks even though their army is toy soldiers with plastic toys. Thats diplomatics for you

im waiting nukes

thats what i say

thats what i say

what a constructive point i agree with you but unfortunately every government are greedy fuckers who want oil, money and power, so we'll continue to attack the poor countries "for the good of their people" to take their oil and look like good guys at the same time

thats what i say

what a constructive point i agree with you but unfortunately every government are greedy fuckers who want oil, money and power, so we'll continue to attack the poor countries "for the good of their people" to take their oil and look like good guys at the same time

I agree Sheriff. First of all we sell arms to Libya and when they start killing there own people. We then pipe up and attack them. Would we still do this if they didn't have oil ?

thats what i say

what a constructive point i agree with you but unfortunately every government are greedy fuckers who want oil, money and power, so we'll continue to attack the poor countries "for the good of their people" to take their oil and look like good guys at the same time

I agree Sheriff. First of all we sell arms to Libya and when they start killing there own people. We then pipe up and attack them. Would we still do this if they didn't have oil ?

nope. Look at Syria and Yemen, i dont think they have oil and it looks worse there than libya! f*cking sick.

thats why when i join and finish from the army im going into politics...somehow become PM of britain and tell everyone to chill the f**k out

And to build more Nuclear Stations so Nukes has a job. Vote for Bridgend Bluebird

And to build more Nuclear Stations so Nukes has a job. Vote for Bridgend Bluebird

i am being serious bout getting into politics after my army career (if i get in) im not expecting to get far as im not the brightest in the world but it seems all politicians do is lie!

And to build more Nuclear Stations so Nukes has a job. Vote for Bridgend Bluebird

i am being serious bout getting into politics after my army career (if i get in) im not expecting to get far as im not the brightest in the world but it seems all politicians do is lie!

You are fully qualified then Chief But good luck on that one

And to build more Nuclear Stations so Nukes has a job. Vote for Bridgend Bluebird

i am being serious bout getting into politics after my army career (if i get in) im not expecting to get far as im not the brightest in the world but it seems all politicians do is lie!

You are fully qualified then Chief But good luck on that one

cheers but as i said im not expecting to get far