http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS...a_2808121.html

"The mental or physical burden of the forced move from their homes
because of the Fukushima accident was the cause of 34 early deaths, said
a report from Japan's Reconstruction Agency on 21 August. The figure
compares to 1916 people from Fukushima, Iwate and Miyagi prefectures
that died during evacuation from areas hit only by the tsunami and the
earthquake. The leading causes of the majority of those early deaths
were disruption to the smooth operation of hospitals, the exacerbation
of pre-existing health problems, and the general 'mental fatigue' from
dramatic changes in life situation."

"If we took a 'do more good than harm' approach I suspect we would
abandon forced evacuation altogether, especially where iodine tables are
available"

--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

Den 29.08.2012 03:28, skrev The Natural Philosopher:
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS...a_2808121.html




"The mental or physical burden of the forced move from their homes
because of the Fukushima accident was the cause of 34 early deaths,
said a report from Japan's Reconstruction Agency on 21 August. The
figure compares to 1916 people from Fukushima, Iwate and Miyagi
prefectures that died during evacuation from areas hit only by the
tsunami and the earthquake. The leading causes of the majority of
those early deaths were disruption to the smooth operation of
hospitals, the exacerbation of pre-existing health problems, and the
general 'mental fatigue' from dramatic changes in life situation."

"If we took a 'do more good than harm' approach I suspect we would
abandon forced evacuation altogether, especially where iodine tables
are available"

This is quite correct. How do we cure this misery?
By education. When you write about radiofobia you
must always tell people how to get cured:
http://www.radiationandreason.com/
For more than half a century the view that radiation represents an
extreme hazard has been accepted. This book challenges that view by
facing the question How dangerous is ionising radiation? Briefly the
answer is that radiation is about a thousand times less hazardous
than suggested by current safety standards.
http://www.youtube.com/user/RadiationAndReason
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/9094430/The-world-has-forgotten-the-real-victims-of-Fukushima.html
As Wade Allison, emeritus professor of physics at Oxford University,
says: €œThe reporting of Fukushima was guided by the Cold War reflex
that matched radiation with fear and mortal danger. Reactors have
been destroyed, but the radiation at Fukushima has caused no loss of
life and is unlikely to do so, even in the next 50 years. The voices
of science and common sense on which the future of mankind depends
were drowned out and remain to be heard, even today. The result has
been unnecessary suffering and great socio-economic damage.€�
--
jo
"La vérité est en marche et rien ne l'arrêtera."
-- Emile Zola,"J'accuse ...", 1898.

On Aug 29, 5:54*am, Jo Stein wrote:
Den 29.08.2012 03:28, skrev The Natural Philosopher:



http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS..._of_Fukushima_...

"The mental or physical burden of the forced move from their homes
because of the Fukushima accident was the cause of 34 early deaths,
said a report from Japan's Reconstruction Agency on 21 August. The
figure compares to 1916 people from Fukushima, Iwate and Miyagi
prefectures that died during evacuation from areas hit only by the
tsunami and the earthquake. The leading causes of the majority of
those early deaths were disruption to the smooth operation of
hospitals, the exacerbation of pre-existing health problems, and the
general 'mental fatigue' from dramatic changes in life situation."

"If we took a 'do more good than harm' approach I suspect we would
abandon forced evacuation altogether, especially where iodine tables
are available"

This is quite correct. How do we cure this misery?
By education. When you write about radiofobia you
must always tell people how to get cured:http://www.radiationandreason.com/ For more than half a century the view that radiation represents an
extreme hazard has been accepted. This book challenges that view by
facing the question How dangerous is ionising radiation? Briefly the
answer is that radiation is about a thousand times less hazardous
than suggested by current safety standards.

http://www.youtube.com/user/RadiationAndReason
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/9094430/The-world-has... As Wade Allison, emeritus professor of physics at Oxford University,
says: “The reporting of Fukushima was guided by the Cold War reflex
that matched radiation with fear and mortal danger. Reactors have
been destroyed, but the radiation at Fukushima has caused no loss of
life and is unlikely to do so, even in the next 50 years. The voices
of science and common sense on which the future of mankind depends
were drowned out and remain to be heard, even today. The result has
been unnecessary suffering and great socio-economic damage.”

--
* * * * * * * * * * * jo
* "La vérité est en marche et rien ne l'arrêtera."
* *-- Emile Zola,"J'accuse ...", 1898.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well would you move your family into the zone?
By how much has people's lives been shortened?
I hear the fish are now radioactive around the NW coast of Japan .
Marie Curie died of radiation induced cancer.

This is all government propaganda so they can build nuclear reactors
(and collect backhanders)

harry wrote:
On Aug 29, 5:54 am, Jo Stein wrote:
Den 29.08.2012 03:28, skrev The Natural Philosopher:



http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS..._of_Fukushima_...
"The mental or physical burden of the forced move from their homes
because of the Fukushima accident was the cause of 34 early deaths,
said a report from Japan's Reconstruction Agency on 21 August. The
figure compares to 1916 people from Fukushima, Iwate and Miyagi
prefectures that died during evacuation from areas hit only by the
tsunami and the earthquake. The leading causes of the majority of
those early deaths were disruption to the smooth operation of
hospitals, the exacerbation of pre-existing health problems, and the
general 'mental fatigue' from dramatic changes in life situation."
"If we took a 'do more good than harm' approach I suspect we would
abandon forced evacuation altogether, especially where iodine tables
are available"
This is quite correct. How do we cure this misery?
By education. When you write about radiofobia you
must always tell people how to get cured:http://www.radiationandreason.com/ For more than half a century the view that radiation represents an
extreme hazard has been accepted. This book challenges that view by
facing the question How dangerous is ionising radiation? Briefly the
answer is that radiation is about a thousand times less hazardous
than suggested by current safety standards.
http://www.youtube.com/user/RadiationAndReason
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/9094430/The-world-has... As Wade Allison, emeritus professor of physics at Oxford University,
says: €œThe reporting of Fukushima was guided by the Cold War reflex
that matched radiation with fear and mortal danger. Reactors have
been destroyed, but the radiation at Fukushima has caused no loss of
life and is unlikely to do so, even in the next 50 years. The voices
of science and common sense on which the future of mankind depends
were drowned out and remain to be heard, even today. The result has
been unnecessary suffering and great socio-economic damage.€�
--
jo
"La vérité est en marche et rien ne l'arrêtera."
-- Emile Zola,"J'accuse ...", 1898.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well would you move your family into the zone?

yes. Would you evacuate your family from Dartmoor?


By how much has people's lives been shortened?

depends on how scared they were.

I hear the fish are now radioactive around the NW coast of Japan .

All fish are radioactive everywhere. You are radioactive.

Marie Curie died of radiation induced cancer.


She was handling radium with bare hands for many years.,

This is all government propaganda so they can build nuclear reactors
(and collect backhanders)


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

Den 29.08.2012 07:39, skrev harry:
On Aug 29, 5:54 am, Jo Stein wrote:
On 29.08.2012 03:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:



http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS..._of_Fukushima_...


....
"If we took a 'do more good than harm' approach I suspect we
would abandon forced evacuation altogether, especially where
iodine tables are available"

This is quite correct. How do we cure this misery? By education.
When you write about radiofobia you must always tell people how to
get cured:http://www.radiationandreason.com/ For more than half a
century the view that radiation represents an
extreme hazard has been accepted. This book challenges that view
by facing the question How dangerous is ionising radiation?
Briefly the answer is that radiation is about a thousand times
less hazardous than suggested by current safety standards.

http://www.youtube.com/user/RadiationAndReason
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/9094430/The-world-has...



As Wade Allison, emeritus professor of physics at Oxford
University,
says: €œThe reporting of Fukushima was guided by the Cold War
reflex that matched radiation with fear and mortal danger.
Reactors have been destroyed, but the radiation at Fukushima has
caused no loss of life and is unlikely to do so, even in the next
50 years. The voices of science and common sense on which the
future of mankind depends were drowned out and remain to be
heard, even today. The result has been unnecessary suffering and
great socio-economic damage.€�
....
Well would you move your family into the zone? By how much has
people's lives been shortened? I hear the fish are now radioactive
around the NW coast of Japan . Marie Curie died of radiation induced
cancer.

This is all government propaganda so they can build nuclear reactors
(and collect backhanders)

I think we agree that The Natural Philosopher is crazy as he is a
climat denialist. He suffer from a delusion. Your delusion is also
very bad. It looks similar to the propaganda we hear from climate
denialist when they tell us that we cannot trust scientists.

I would have no problem moving my family into the zone. I can read
and I understand the book written by prof. emeritus Wade Allison.
The big problem facing the world today is green idiots like you.
Because of your ignorance we are unable to solve the big problem
facing us, how to get rid of dirty energy production.

Not only the fish is radioactive, also harry is radioactive.
I guess you are fat as stupid people also tend to be fat.
Then you have about one billion Bq in your body because of
natural radiation. Yes, one billion. I have about 610 000 000
ionizations in my body per second. Pleaase, go and learn how
we are designed to tolerate this radiation.

If you read the book by Wade Allison, I promise that I will
read this book:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Fear
State of Fear is a 2004 techno-thriller novel by Michael Crichton
concerning eco-terrorists who attempt mass murder to support their
views. The novel had an initial print run of 1.5 million copies and
reached the #1 bestseller position at Amazon.com and #2 on the New
York Times Best Seller list for one week in January 2005. The book
contains many graphs and footnotes, two appendices, and a
twenty-page bibliography. Most climate scientists dispute Crichton's
science as being error-filled and distorted.[

Criton was a MD and a author. Had he been a skilled MD, he might still
be among us. He died from cancer caused by smoking:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton
In accordance with the private way in which Crichton lived his life,
his throat cancer was not made public until his death.

The author Freud smoke cigars at it killed him.
He did not understand science. Get a life, learn science.
--
jo
€œThere is a tension between short-term, individual welfare
and long-term, group welfare or world welfare.
If it were left to Darwinism alone, there could be no hope.
Short-term greed is bound to win. The only hope lies in
the unique human capacity to use our big brains with our
massive communal database and our forward-simulating imaginations.€�
€”From Dr. Dawkins' acceptance speech at the 2001 Kistler Prize Banquet

On 29/08/2012 09:55, Jo Stein wrote:
Den 29.08.2012 07:39, skrev harry:
On Aug 29, 5:54 am, Jo Stein wrote:
On 29.08.2012 03:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:



http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS..._of_Fukushima_...



...
"If we took a 'do more good than harm' approach I suspect we
would abandon forced evacuation altogether, especially where
iodine tables are available"

This is quite correct. How do we cure this misery? By education.
When you write about radiofobia you must always tell people how to
get cured:http://www.radiationandreason.com/ For more than half a
century the view that radiation represents an
extreme hazard has been accepted. This book challenges that view
by facing the question How dangerous is ionising radiation?
Briefly the answer is that radiation is about a thousand times
less hazardous than suggested by current safety standards.

http://www.youtube.com/user/RadiationAndReason
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/9094430/The-world-has...

As Wade Allison, emeritus professor of physics at Oxford
University,
says: €œThe reporting of Fukushima was guided by the Cold War
reflex that matched radiation with fear and mortal danger.
Reactors have been destroyed, but the radiation at Fukushima has
caused no loss of life and is unlikely to do so, even in the next
50 years. The voices of science and common sense on which the
future of mankind depends were drowned out and remain to be
heard, even today. The result has been unnecessary suffering and
great socio-economic damage.€�
...
Well would you move your family into the zone? By how much has
people's lives been shortened? I hear the fish are now radioactive
around the NW coast of Japan . Marie Curie died of radiation induced
cancer.

This is all government propaganda so they can build nuclear reactors
(and collect backhanders)

I think we agree that The Natural Philosopher is crazy as he is a
climat denialist. He suffer from a delusion. Your delusion is also
very bad. It looks similar to the propaganda we hear from climate
denialist when they tell us that we cannot trust scientists.

The greens and antigreens do very much the same sort of deliberate
misrepresentation of the facts but with opposite spins.

I would have no problem moving my family into the zone. I can read
and I understand the book written by prof. emeritus Wade Allison.
The big problem facing the world today is green idiots like you.
Because of your ignorance we are unable to solve the big problem
facing us, how to get rid of dirty energy production.

Coal fired power stations actually emit more radioacivity into the
environment from burning coal than a nuclear plant is allowed to!

Not only the fish is radioactive, also harry is radioactive.
I guess you are fat as stupid people also tend to be fat.
Then you have about one billion Bq in your body because of
natural radiation. Yes, one billion. I have about 610 000 000
ionizations in my body per second. Pleaase, go and learn how
we are designed to tolerate this radiation.

No you don't. You are wrong by 5 *ORDERS* of magnitude. 100,000x

This is gibberish and you don't have a clue what you are talking about.
The dominant natural radioactivity in the human body is a trace
radioisotope of potassium and whole body content is about 40mg. There is
also some natural Carbon 14. This translates to about 10,000 Bq about
one hundred thousandth of the dose you claim. A correct set of figures
for radioactive components of a typical human is online at:

http://physics.isu.edu/radinf/natural.htm
(title Human Body)

All up the grand total is about 10 kBq mostly from K40 and C14.
Everything else adds up to less than 100 Bq.

If you read the book by Wade Allison, I promise that I will
read this book:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Fear
State of Fear is a 2004 techno-thriller novel by Michael Crichton
concerning eco-terrorists who attempt mass murder to support their
views. The novel had an initial print run of 1.5 million copies and
reached the #1 bestseller position at Amazon.com and #2 on the New
York Times Best Seller list for one week in January 2005. The book
contains many graphs and footnotes, two appendices, and a
twenty-page bibliography. Most climate scientists dispute Crichton's
science as being error-filled and distorted.[

Criton was a MD and a author. Had he been a skilled MD, he might still
be among us. He died from cancer caused by smoking:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton
In accordance with the private way in which Crichton lived his life,
his throat cancer was not made public until his death.

The author Freud smoke cigars at it killed him.
He did not understand science. Get a life, learn science.

I think you need to learn some science first. Your numbers are insane.
If you had 1 GBq of radioactivity you would be a 1/37 curie open source
and would set of radiation alarms when you tried to travel abroad.

We would be looking to bury you in a lead lined casket as was done for
the unfortunate Eben Byers due to his use of Radithor patent medicine :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eben_Byers

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

Martin Brown wrote:
On 29/08/2012 09:55, Jo Stein wrote:

The author Freud smoke cigars at it killed him.
He did not understand science. Get a life, learn science.

I think you need to learn some science first. Your numbers are insane.

Jo Stein is patently insane.

If you had 1 GBq of radioactivity you would be a 1/37 curie open source
and would set of radiation alarms when you tried to travel abroad.

We would be looking to bury you in a lead lined casket as was done for
the unfortunate Eben Byers due to his use of Radithor patent medicine :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eben_Byers



--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

On 29.08.2012 12:18, Martin Brown wrote:
On 29/08/2012 09:55, Jo Stein wrote:
On 29.08.2012 07:39, skrev harry wrote:
....
This is all government propaganda so they can build nuclear
reactors (and collect backhanders)

I think we agree that The Natural Philosopher is crazy as he is a
climat denialist. He suffer from a delusion. Your delusion is also
very bad. It looks similar to the propaganda we hear from climate
denialist when they tell us that we cannot trust scientists.

The greens and antigreens do very much the same sort of deliberate
misrepresentation of the facts but with opposite spins.

I would have no problem moving my family into the zone. I can read
and I understand the book written by prof. emeritus Wade Allison.
The big problem facing the world today is green idiots like you.
Because of your ignorance we are unable to solve the big problem
facing us, how to get rid of dirty energy production.

Coal fired power stations actually emit more radioacivity into the
environment from burning coal than a nuclear plant is allowed to!

Not only the fish is radioactive, also harry is radioactive. I
guess you are fat as stupid people also tend to be fat. Then you
have about one billion Bq in your body because of natural
radiation. Yes, one billion. I have about 610 000 000 ionizations
in my body per second. Pleaase, go and learn how we are designed
to tolerate this radiation.

No you don't. You are wrong by 5 *ORDERS* of magnitude. 100,000x

This is gibberish and you don't have a clue what you are talking
about. The dominant natural radioactivity in the human body is a
trace radioisotope of potassium and whole body content is about
40mg. There is also some natural Carbon 14. This translates to about
10,000 Bq about one hundred thousandth of the dose you claim. A
correct set of figures for radioactive components of a typical human
is online at:

http://physics.isu.edu/radinf/natural.htm (title Human Body)

All up the grand total is about 10 kBq mostly from K40 and C14.
Everything else adds up to less than 100 Bq.

What is you weight. I can compute similar figures for you.
It is a very simple formula given on page 133 in this book:
http://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/8819091

I could have scanned the page for you.
Here follows the same page in Norwegian as I am sure that
a smart guy like you will be able to tell where Thormod Henriksen
and David H. Maillie went wrong:
De fleste blir forbauset og litt vantro når de hører at naturlig
stråling fører til omkring 500 millioner ioniseringer i kroppen
hvert eneste sekund. Hvis du er interessert i å vite hvordan vi
finner frem til dette, så følg med:

Antall ioniseringer er proposjonalt med kroppsvekten. For en
sumobryter kan antall ioniseringer fort komme opp i 1 milliard pr.
sekund, mens det neppe er mer enn halvparten for danserinnen.

Figur 7.1 angir de ulike strålekilder og tilhørende årsdoser (gitt
i mSv). Ved beregning av antall ioniseringer, må vi se på
stråleenergien som absorberes i kroppen og regne årsdosene i mGy.
Det betyr at radon, med sin høye vektfaktor, spiller en vesentlig
mindre rolle enn antydet i Figur 7. 1. Hvis vi videre kutter ut
doser fra medisinsk strålebruk, vil de naturlige strålekildene gi
oss en årsdose på ca. 1,5 mGy. Det betyr at 1,5 millijoule
strålingsenergi blir absorbert pr. kg pr. år.

For atomære prosesser er det vanlig å angi energien i elektronvolt
(eV). Den er definert som;

leV = 1,6 · 10-19 J

En dose på 1,5 mGy, omregnet til elektronvolt, blir dermed:

9,4 · 1015 eV

Videre må vi finne ut hvor mye energi som går med til én
ionisering.

Vi vet at det går med ca. 34 eV for å danne et ionepar i luft.
Samtidig dannes det flere eksitasjoner, men det skal vi holde
utenfor i dette regnestykket.

La oss anta at det går med 34 eV til én ionisering i kroppen.
Antall ioniseringer pr. kg pr. år blir da:

2,75 · 1014

Hvis en person veier 70 kg, blir det totale antall ioniseringer
pr. sekund:

(2,75 . 1014 . 70)/(365 . 24 . 60 . 60)

Utregnet blir det 610 millioner ioniseringer pr. sekund. Dette er
et ufattelig stort tall, og det er lite vi kan gjøre for å hindre
alle disse ioniseringene. Vi er tilpasset et naturlig strålingsnivå
og har et reparasjonssystem. Vi har ikke noe grunnlag for å hevde
at det fører til skadelige effekter. Vi vet således ikke om det
ville vært en fordel å flytte til et sted med lavere
bakgrunnstråling.
--
jo
".. I think it's important to realize that when two opposite
points of view are expressed with equal intensity, the truth
does not necessarily lie exactly halfway between them.
It is possible for one side to be simply wrong." Richard Dawkins

Jo Stein wrote:


I think we agree that The Natural Philosopher is crazy as he is a
climat denialist. He suffer from a delusion. Your delusion is also
very bad. It looks similar to the propaganda we hear from climate
denialist when they tell us that we cannot trust scientists.


I love the idea of someone denying that climate exists, or changes.

Only a crazy mentally deficient scandinavian would even think such a
thing was possible.


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

On Aug 29, 9:55*am, Jo Stein wrote:
Den 29.08.2012 07:39, skrev harry:



On Aug 29, 5:54 am, Jo Stein wrote:
On 29.08.2012 03:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS..._of_Fukushima_....

...
"If we took a 'do more good than harm' approach I suspect we
would abandon forced evacuation altogether, especially where
iodine tables are available"

This is quite correct. How do we cure this misery? By education.
When you write about radiofobia you must always tell people how to
get cured:http://www.radiationandreason.com/ For more than half a
century the view that radiation represents an
extreme hazard has been accepted. This book challenges that view
by facing the question How dangerous is ionising radiation?
Briefly the answer is that radiation is about a thousand times
less hazardous than suggested by current safety standards.

http://www.youtube.com/user/RadiationAndReason
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/9094430/The-world-has....

As Wade Allison, emeritus professor of physics at Oxford
University,
says: “The reporting of Fukushima was guided by the Cold War
reflex that matched radiation with fear and mortal danger.
Reactors have been destroyed, but the radiation at Fukushima has
caused no loss of life and is unlikely to do so, even in the next
50 years. The voices of science and common sense on which the
future of mankind depends were drowned out and remain to be
heard, even today. The result has been unnecessary suffering and
great socio-economic damage.”
...
Well would you move your family into the zone? By how much has
people's lives been shortened? I hear the fish are now radioactive
around the NW coast of Japan . Marie Curie died of radiation induced
cancer.

This is all government propaganda so they can build nuclear reactors
*(and collect backhanders)

I think we agree that The Natural Philosopher is crazy as he is a
climat denialist. He suffer from a delusion. Your delusion is also
very bad. It looks similar to the propaganda we hear from climate
denialist when they tell us that we cannot trust scientists.

I would have no problem moving my family into the zone. I can read
and I understand the book written by prof. emeritus Wade Allison.
The big problem facing the world today is green idiots like you.
Because of your ignorance we are unable to solve the big problem
facing us, how to get rid of dirty energy production.

Not only the fish is radioactive, also harry is radioactive.
I guess you are fat as stupid people also tend to be fat.
Then you have about one billion Bq in your body because of
natural radiation. Yes, one billion. I have about 610 000 000
ionizations in my body per second. Pleaase, go and learn how
we are designed to tolerate this radiation.

If you read the book by Wade Allison, I promise that I will
read this book:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Fear

State of Fear is a 2004 techno-thriller novel by Michael Crichton
concerning eco-terrorists who attempt mass murder to support their
views. The novel had an initial print run of 1.5 million copies and
reached the #1 bestseller position at Amazon.com and #2 on the New
York Times Best Seller list for one week in January 2005. The book
contains many graphs and footnotes, two appendices, and a
twenty-page bibliography. Most climate scientists dispute Crichton's
science as being error-filled and distorted.[

Criton was a MD and a author. Had he been a skilled MD, he might still
be among us. He died from cancer caused by smoking:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton

In accordance with the private way in which Crichton lived his life,
*his throat cancer was not made public until his death.

The author Freud smoke cigars at it killed him.
He did not understand science. Get a life, learn science.
--
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *jo
* *“There is a tension between short-term, individual welfare
* *and long-term, group welfare or world welfare.
* *If it were left to Darwinism alone, there could be no hope.
* *Short-term greed is bound to win. The only hope lies in
* *the unique human capacity to use our big brains with our
* *massive communal database and our forward-simulating imaginations.”
* *—From Dr. Dawkins' acceptance speech at the 2001 Kistler Prize Banquet- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The reason nobody died of radiation poisoning at Fukushima is that the
population was moved out pronto. As simple as that.
If it was as safe as you seem to think, the could have stayed at home.

"harry" wrote in message
...

The reason nobody died of radiation poisoning at Fukushima is that the
population was moved out pronto. As simple as that.
If it was as safe as you seem to think, the could have stayed at home.

That is the whole point, they could have stayed at home.

harry wrote:
On Aug 29, 9:55 am, Jo Stein wrote:
Den 29.08.2012 07:39, skrev harry:



On Aug 29, 5:54 am, Jo Stein wrote:
On 29.08.2012 03:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS..._of_Fukushima_...
...
"If we took a 'do more good than harm' approach I suspect we
would abandon forced evacuation altogether, especially where
iodine tables are available"
This is quite correct. How do we cure this misery? By education.
When you write about radiofobia you must always tell people how to
get cured:http://www.radiationandreason.com/ For more than half a
century the view that radiation represents an
extreme hazard has been accepted. This book challenges that view
by facing the question How dangerous is ionising radiation?
Briefly the answer is that radiation is about a thousand times
less hazardous than suggested by current safety standards.
http://www.youtube.com/user/RadiationAndReason
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/9094430/The-world-has...
As Wade Allison, emeritus professor of physics at Oxford
University,
says: €œThe reporting of Fukushima was guided by the Cold War
reflex that matched radiation with fear and mortal danger.
Reactors have been destroyed, but the radiation at Fukushima has
caused no loss of life and is unlikely to do so, even in the next
50 years. The voices of science and common sense on which the
future of mankind depends were drowned out and remain to be
heard, even today. The result has been unnecessary suffering and
great socio-economic damage.€�
...
Well would you move your family into the zone? By how much has
people's lives been shortened? I hear the fish are now radioactive
around the NW coast of Japan . Marie Curie died of radiation induced
cancer.
This is all government propaganda so they can build nuclear reactors
(and collect backhanders)
I think we agree that The Natural Philosopher is crazy as he is a
climat denialist. He suffer from a delusion. Your delusion is also
very bad. It looks similar to the propaganda we hear from climate
denialist when they tell us that we cannot trust scientists.

I would have no problem moving my family into the zone. I can read
and I understand the book written by prof. emeritus Wade Allison.
The big problem facing the world today is green idiots like you.
Because of your ignorance we are unable to solve the big problem
facing us, how to get rid of dirty energy production.

Not only the fish is radioactive, also harry is radioactive.
I guess you are fat as stupid people also tend to be fat.
Then you have about one billion Bq in your body because of
natural radiation. Yes, one billion. I have about 610 000 000
ionizations in my body per second. Pleaase, go and learn how
we are designed to tolerate this radiation.

If you read the book by Wade Allison, I promise that I will
read this book:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Fear

State of Fear is a 2004 techno-thriller novel by Michael Crichton
concerning eco-terrorists who attempt mass murder to support their
views. The novel had an initial print run of 1.5 million copies and
reached the #1 bestseller position at Amazon.com and #2 on the New
York Times Best Seller list for one week in January 2005. The book
contains many graphs and footnotes, two appendices, and a
twenty-page bibliography. Most climate scientists dispute Crichton's
science as being error-filled and distorted.[
Criton was a MD and a author. Had he been a skilled MD, he might still
be among us. He died from cancer caused by smoking:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton

In accordance with the private way in which Crichton lived his life,
his throat cancer was not made public until his death.
The author Freud smoke cigars at it killed him.
He did not understand science. Get a life, learn science.
--
jo
€œThere is a tension between short-term, individual welfare
and long-term, group welfare or world welfare.
If it were left to Darwinism alone, there could be no hope.
Short-term greed is bound to win. The only hope lies in
the unique human capacity to use our big brains with our
massive communal database and our forward-simulating imaginations.€�
€”From Dr. Dawkins' acceptance speech at the 2001 Kistler Prize Banquet- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The reason nobody died of radiation poisoning at Fukushima is that the
population was moved out pronto. As simple as that.
If it was as safe as you seem to think, the could have stayed at home.

They could have.

The reason they were safe is that the most dangerous emission - Iodine
131 - is dealt with by taking iodine pills and its gone very quickly.

The whole point of the article is that rapid evacuation is what killed
the people. Not the radiation they were exposed to and not the
radiation they would have been exposed to.



--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

Yes, moving house is, as we are often told, one of the most stressful things
you can do.
I'd have expected Japan to have been one of the world experts on radiation
though given the history.
I do notice though that there is increasing evidence that the body reacts
differently to a constant low level giving a higher dose than a sudden high
dose given in a shorter time. the genetic make up of the individual can
often make a huge difference to the actual damage it seems.
Brian

--
--
From the sofa of Brian Gaff -

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS...a_2808121.html

"The mental or physical burden of the forced move from their homes because
of the Fukushima accident was the cause of 34 early deaths, said a report
from Japan's Reconstruction Agency on 21 August. The figure compares to
1916 people from Fukushima, Iwate and Miyagi prefectures that died during
evacuation from areas hit only by the tsunami and the earthquake. The
leading causes of the majority of those early deaths were disruption to
the smooth operation of hospitals, the exacerbation of pre-existing health
problems, and the general 'mental fatigue' from dramatic changes in life
situation."

"If we took a 'do more good than harm' approach I suspect we would abandon
forced evacuation altogether, especially where iodine tables are
available"

--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members
of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded
with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

Brian Gaff wrote:
Yes, moving house is, as we are often told, one of the most stressful things
you can do.
I'd have expected Japan to have been one of the world experts on radiation
though given the history.
I do notice though that there is increasing evidence that the body reacts
differently to a constant low level giving a higher dose than a sudden high
dose given in a shorter time. the genetic make up of the individual can
often make a huge difference to the actual damage it seems.
Brian

The problem is that the safety levels are set insanely low: How can you
say 'yes the radiation is 30 times normal, but its still perfectly safe'?


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.