A guide to radiation for the clueless...

JWF

Generali wrote: »

Did anyone read the link in my OP? Just wondering because I'm seeing a lot of hysteria and little of it seems to refer to the post in the beginning.

Yes, and the conclusion is that eating a banana is better (and probably tastier) than spending 10 minutes chucking lumps of graphite in to the still burning Chernobyl reactor.

Oh and something about radiation releases from Nuclear power stations normally being nothing to worry about - but ignore the last bit BECAUSE RADIATION IS SPAWN OF THE DEVIL (I know that last bit because the Daily Mail said so).

fimonkey

Its a lost cause Generali! People don't seem to WANT to understand radiation, even some health professionals I've worked with (medical imaging professionals in particular) do not understand radiation and its measurement and its relation to risk.

For those who want to read the OP post again, here are a few FACTS to add to it.

Your life time risk of cancer is 1 in 3!
There is no definite known risk of cancer at doses less than 100mSv
At doses less than 10mSv it is impossibe to prove that any ill effect is from the radiation exposure rather than environmental factors.
Your average background dose in the UK is 2.5mSv (range 1.5 to 7.5mSv)
Airline crew receive up to 8mSv per year.

No where in the news are they mentioning doses and the risk, The only mention I heard was 400mSv directly on top of one of the plants in Fukishima, but the dose drops 4 fold for every metre away from the source (inverse square law).

I can back up my facts, If i had a choice of lifestyle factors I would live in Tokya and eat Japanese food than smoke 5 cigarrettes a day from age 20.

How many of those panicing about the radiation would subject themselves to a CT scan for a 'well being' check?

Thanks again Generali!

Joe_Bloggs

More than twenty five years on some good news !
http://www.farmersguardian.com/home/livestock/scotland%E2%80%99s-chernobyl-sheep-no-longer-radioactive/32935.article
J_B.

michaels

However :

In North Wales 330 holdings and approximately 180,000 sheep remain within a restricted area and a further eight holdings in Cumbria are also still under restriction.

Joe_Bloggs wrote: »

More than twenty five years on some good news !
http://www.farmersguardian.com/home/livestock/scotland%E2%80%99s-chernobyl-sheep-no-longer-radioactive/32935.article
J_B.

...

Generali

fimonkey wrote: »

Its a lost cause Generali! People don't seem to WANT to understand radiation, even some health professionals I've worked with (medical imaging professionals in particular) do not understand radiation and its measurement and its relation to risk.

I think it's the whole silent killer thing myself. That and the fact that people are notoriously bad at estimating risk.

Here's a handy cut-out-'n'-keep factoid*. People with depression are far more likely to judge the chances of something bad happening (eg losing their job, dying in the next year etc.) than the general population.




*I take no responsibility for the hole in you monitor and possible injury caused if you actually attempt to cut this out.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

Generali wrote: »

I think it's the whole silent killer thing myself. That and the fact that people are notoriously bad at estimating risk.

Here's a handy cut-out-'n'-keep factoid*. People with depression are far more likely to judge the chances of something bad happening (eg losing their job, dying in the next year etc.) than the general population.

*I take no responsibility for the hole in you monitor and possible injury caused if you actually attempt to cut this out.

Factoid No 2

People that kill themselves die

Generali

Headlines About Japan's Nuclear Crisis Could Be Way Overblown

"I have been reading every news release on the incident since the earthquake. There has not been one single (!) report that was accurate and free of errors (and part of that problem is also a weakness in the Japanese crisis communication). By "not free of errors" I do not refer to tendentious anti-nuclear journalism -- that is quite normal these days. By "not free of errors" I mean blatant errors regarding physics and natural law, as well as gross misinterpretation of facts, due to an obvious lack of fundamental and basic understanding of the way nuclear reactors are build and operated."

amcluesent

Tokyo's tap water is unfit for babies to drink after radiation from Japan's quake-hit nuclear plant affected the capital's water supply

Reykjavik is first European city to detect particles from Japan

FACT - best stock up with bottled water and iodine tablets now!

fimonkey

No where in the news are they reporting actual figures for the levels though - which doesn't help anyone discussing it assess the risks. So tapwater is unsafe to drink - just issue iodine tablets then any radioactive iodine won't have an effect.

Does anyone know what the radioactive element coming from the plant actually is? In Chernobyl it was ceasium I believe. Radioactivity's not my area of expertise but it all depends on the length of the half life of whatever's decaying as well as the dose emitted. If the media could give us these facts this could be an intelligent debate rather than panic and scare mongering.

Either way I'm still not bothered, I'll dig out some common risks later which, when in context against the risk of radiation may help give some perspective.

mbga9pgf

They could detect nuclear weapons tests here in the UK that took place in the pacific !!!!!!!! Any minute increase is measurable.