Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird
You are wrong, it already has. Just that the bodies still walk, like hens whose head was cut off. You do not stay inside a zone with a contamination of that level, and do net get affected in your health. Many of the workers there, are already sentenced to death, I'm sure. The intoxication of the environment will affect many thousands more over the coming years - just give it some time to uncover. there is now plutonium found outside the perimeter. Radiation in sweet water 300 miles away. Heavily intoxicated sea water. And at least one ongoing meltdown.
Halleluja.
Offsprings of survivors of the two atom bombs keep on to producing ill and deformed babies until today.
No one killed - really...?
|
What is your understanding of radiation health physics?
You seem to have fully swallowed what you are being fed by journalists (known the world over as a group for their aptitude at high energy physics). There are virtually no reports that don't mix up dose rates with doses or
vice versa. Some look like they don't know micro from mili. Still others don't understand the difference between contamination and exposure.
Will some of the on the scene workers suffer health effects down the road? I think that is probably certain, though much is their own fault (there was no reason for those guys to have gotten the sunburn they got (that's about as bad as their beta burn was, after all (different mechanism, similar effect), because betas are stopped by a sheet of paper. ANY protection would have protected them. Sending crews into deep puddles with ankle high boots? The cause is ultimately stupidity there. Still, they have a bad sunburn, and a similarly higher risk of a skin cancer.
The exposure levels in general are worse than average for on the scene workers, and nothing to worry about so far for everyone else. So far no non-responders have been exposed to more than what airline pilots might get at high altitude.
Nuclear power—including all the accidents—is
grossly safer than coal, and it's even safer than SOLAR in terms of deaths per terawatt produced. If this accident were to kill 10X the number at Chernobyl, nuclear power would STILL be safer. Anti-nuclear hysteria is just that. It's not rational.