work in progress - -
NOTICE HOW PEOPLE CONTINUE TO COMPARE AMBIENT EXTERNAL RADIATION EXPOSURE WITH INTERNAL INGESTION OF RADIOISOTOPES (like when you INHALE RADIOACTIVE SMOKE) - this is comparing oranges with apples, or more like comparing the Earth and the Sun (oranges are too similar to apples!) - THIS IS BAD SCIENCE COMING FROM OUR PUBLIC HEALTH OFFICIALS! THEY ARE NOT PROTECTING US, BUT ARE MISLEADING US!
NOTICE HOW PEOPLE CONTINUE TO COMPARE AMBIENT EXTERNAL RADIATION EXPOSURE WITH INTERNAL INGESTION OF RADIOISOTOPES (like when you INHALE RADIOACTIVE SMOKE) - this is comparing oranges with apples, or more like comparing the Earth and the Sun (oranges are too similar to apples!) - THIS IS BAD SCIENCE COMING FROM OUR PUBLIC HEALTH OFFICIALS! THEY ARE NOT PROTECTING US, BUT ARE MISLEADING US!
of course they are completely different! - our skin evolved to deal with most if not all _natural external radiation; but our lungs were not built the same way - not for inhaling _unnatural radioactive particles which can get stuck in there... nor our digestive tract as we consume contaminated foodstuffs and assimilate radioisotopes into our tissues where they irradiate the adjoining cells in immediate proximity over time... the EPA, FDA, NRC, et al are CRIMINAL!
•
SALMON, Idaho |
Paul Ritter, health physicist with the state environmental agency, said in the area of the mining sites, smoke from the fire showed amounts of radiation roughly equivalent to emissions from a fire in 2000 that charred parts of Los Alamos National Laboratory, the nuclear weapons design facility in New Mexico.
"The readings are definitely elevated but not out of line with what has been measured in fires before. It is not a risk," he said.
Americans are exposed to an estimated 310 millirems of radiation a year from natural sources, including some rocks and soils, according to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
An analysis of air samples in North Fork showed residents would have been exposed to 0.5 millirems of radiation in a 30-day period. That compares to a dose of 5 millirems delivered by a round-trip transcontinental flight, Ritter said.
"Residents certainly weren't in a bad state in terms of airborne radioactivity," he said.
•
•
More than three decades ago, the world’s first catastrophic accident at a large commercial nuclear plant — the March, 1979 partial meltdown at the Three Mile Island(TMI) plant in Pennsylvania — inspired us to write Nukespeak: The Selling of Nuclear Technology in America, which outlined howa new and Orwellian public relations-oriented language spoken by nuclear developers had evolved. Nukespeak is a language of evasion and euphemism, of minimizing and sanitizing, and of public relations and promotion. It is a language where catastrophes are rendered harmless by sterile words; and where an “accident” can never happen, since it is instead defined as an event, an incident, anabnormal evolution, a normal aberration, or a plant transient… Nukespeak takes its cues and techniques from the worlds of advertising, sales and marketing, since it too is blatantly aimed at selling us something we don’t need –and which in this case would otherwise be deemed dangerous and foolhardy.
from Fukushima’s Unhappy Anniversary | Nukespeak
Nukespeak | Nuclear Language, Myths and Mindset
•
FDA’s Comparison of Radiation in Milk to Everyday Exposures Called ‘Improper’
WASHINGTON, D.C.—A U.S. Food and Drug Administration statement regarding milk contaminated with radiation from Japan failed to accurately inform and educate the public, five watchdog groups and a former senior advisor in the U.S. Department of Energy said today, pointing to the fact that exposure to ingested iodine-131 is substantively different than everyday exposure to radiation in the environment.
On March 30, in response to reports that radioactive iodine-131 has been found in milk in Washington state, FDA senior scientist Patricia Hansen said, “Radiation is all around us in our daily lives, and these findings are a miniscule amount compared to what people experience every day. For example, a person would be exposed to low levels of radiation on a round trip cross country flight, watching television, and even from construction materials.”
“This is an apples-to-oranges comparison that lacks integrity. There is a big difference between ingesting radioactive material that accumulates in the thyroid and sitting on an airplane. You can’t drink a TV or eat an airplane.”
The joint FDA/EPA statement from March 30 2011 is available here:
http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm249146.htm
•
see also
whats up: Nuclear Power = Crime Against Humanity
whats up: nukespeak
No comments:
Post a Comment