[ RadSafe ] Re: Nuclear Power Plant Effluents / and TFP

[Pete_Bailey at fpl.com]

A funny story about petabytes. About ten years ago, Sony introduced a
robotic data tape library that could hold over a petabyte. At their
original showing of it, the product was named the "Petafile." The next time

we saw it, the same product was called "Petasite." I think there was a
marketing guy looking for work.

>>> Funnay, LMAO !

RE: TFP, I understand the basic statistics. I wanted to try and really
understand their claim. The original post implied: "When Salem was shut
down there were X cases of cancer in the area over several years. When
Salem started up there were 1.3X cases of cancer over a similar time
frame." That's why I was asking questions--not because I was worried, but
I'm trying to understand the "science" behind the statement. (note the
"science" in quotes). Of course there are so many other confounding factors

and also the random probability of cancers occurring in any given
population over any given period of time could be the explanation for this.

I think someone said, "don't try and understand TFP data." Perhaps that's
the best advice yet.

>>> TFP doesn't use "science", they use the juxtaposition of words to infer
a specific point.  Note in their discussion about # of cases and Salem's
operating status, the absence of addresswing the latency period : time
between exposure to carconigen and diagnosis . . .even the time between the
real 'start of cancer cell growth' and diagnosis can be lengthly (months),
time between diagnosis & death can be very long.
You'll note they don't say "The Realeases Caused...".
They'll state 'facts' : # of cases ( deaths ? New diagnosis ? not sure)
                      : Plant operating dates
                      : Not all effluents seen, not detected

Well , there it is: plant operating, can't see all effluents, more cancer.
Sounds like cause & effect to me   ( not ! )

     Pete