[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: FLYOVER SHOWS INDIAN POINT'S A SITTING DUCK
From: Tim [mailto:tstead@ntirs.org]
> O.K., that makes sense. I agree that many people were
> harmed as a result of Chernobyl due to nothing but
> stress. Heck, thousands of unborn children were
Especially the 'stresses' of unwarranted fear promulgated by rad protectionists; and the effect of being unnecessarily relocated promulgated by the same people (at a dose limit less than the AVG terrestrial dose in Norway - much less high dose areas!)
> harmed when their mothers aborted them. Then you have
100,000+?
> the grieving that goes along with such a loss. That
> can be a harm also.
>
> The question is, though, was more harm done as a
> result of unsubstantiated, groundless, and baseless
> fears of all things nuclear or were the actions taken
> by people warranted? Was some of it warranted but
Virtually none 'warranted.' The 'warranted' actions, early evacuation of nearby residents, and interdicting iodine-contaminated foods, were not done.
> other actions not? How much of the unwarranted
> actions were a direct result of the anti-nuclear
> fearmongerers? How much of that harm can you lay at
The rad-protectionists were the fear-mongers. Anti-nukes have no influence except by the complicity of the rad-protectionists (as described by Lauriston Taylor as 'an immoral application of our scientific heritage').
> the feet of the anti-nuclear movement and how much can
> be laid at the feet of the USSR? I'd say they are
You can argue USSR 'caused' the accident, and failed a timely response. The real damage to the public was by the int'l rad protectionists. The leaders that know and suppress the data are directly responsible.
> equally culpable...more so the USSR government since
> it was their lackluster attitude towards safety that
> caused the accident to begin with.
>
> I firmly believe that the RBMKs were a disaster
> waiting to happen and if it would not have been
> Chernobyl, it would have been another one of their
> plants sometime later.
>
> Despite all the arguments about the effects of
> Chernobyl, I still would not have wanted to have been
> around the plant when it blew. I defy anyone to
> honestly say that, knowing then what they know now,
> they would not have minded one bit to have been
> travelling near the plant when it blew.
How do you define 'near'? :-)
> Tim
>
> --- Franz Schoenhofer <franz.schoenhofer@chello.at>
> wrote:
> >
> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Tim <tstead@ntirs.org>
> > An: radsafe <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
> > Datum: Sonntag, 28. April 2002 22:14
> > Betreff: Re: FLYOVER SHOWS INDIAN POINT'S A SITTING
> > DUCK
> >
> >
> > >Just out of curiosity, were you implying that
> > >radiation can cause a myocardial infarction (MI)?
> > I
> > >always thought that an MI was due to restricted
> > >cardiac arteries as a result of a thrombus (such as
> > >plaque - e.g. arthlerosclerotic coronary artery
> > >disease) thereby decreasing the blood flow to the
> > >myocardium and resulting in an infarct (e.g. heart
> > >attack).
> > >
> > >Or was this just a general discussion of how
> > someone
> > >could be harmed from something and not necessarily
> > >limited to harm from radiation?
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > No, I was not implying, that radiation could be the
> > direct cause of a
> > myocardial infarction - unfortunately I have had to
> > inform me carefully
> > about this topic. My comment was clearly directed to
> > the definition of
> > harm - and that harm does not only mean death. Harm
> > can also be, if you have
> > to leave your home, if you loose your social
> > connections, if you cannot live
> > and behave the way you used to do. That such stress
> > can also cause clinical
> > illness is on the other side well known - starting
> > from alcoholism even to
> > cardiac infarction. The social disaster and most of
> > the health problems
> > after the Chernobyl accident were caused by the
> > situation after the accident
> > and not the radiation. That the thyroid problems of
> > children were caused by
> > I-131 and its radiation is a fact, which probably
> > only a few real hardliners
> > dispute.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Franz
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness
http://health.yahoo.com
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.
You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/