Unless the rain carries to CA that is. But I doubt it will if it even does rain.
*Radiation reaches USA*
- Thread starter myself
- Start date
Unless the rain carries to CA that is. But I doubt it will if it even does rain.
- Nov 12, 2008
- 14,153
- 1,334
- 0
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/so/sp
I already explained it. The fact of the matter is there is simply too large of a distance, and too small of an ammount of radioactive material in the plant to actually reach the US in a large enough ammount that it would cause widespread problems. Radation levels might rise a few times above what is normal for a short period of time, but we can survive that no problem. I've had CT scans before and I surrived, and the amount of radation emitted from those is A LOT higher then what would be experienced here.
There honest to god is very little to no concern for us.
Let's put it this way: I was alive when Chernobyl happened, and I'm still here safe and sound. Please note - the majority of people who suffered ill-effects from the Chernobyl disaster were the rescue workers, and people at ground zero. But for the most part, there is
This is from a World Health Organization report that has been studying the Chernobyl disaster for the past twenty years, and they've studied the disaster's effect on the population nearby. The real issues of the Chernobyl people were more or less psychological and mental, as people felt stigmatized from society due to being called "radioactive."
The study, in all its glory, is here, and I recommend reading it if you have fears. Also, remember, we're not even close to Japan. I'm guessing (although I don't have proof at this point) that the WWII bombs were far more dangerous because they contained much higher levels of radioactive materials, and they were NOT contained - plus they were meant to disperse as much devastation in as wide of a radius as possible.
Trufax: If you really want to be afraid of something that will give you cancer, you should really be looking more at the foods you're eating. Those are bigger causes of death/destruction than any radiation from Japan.
Just my two cents.
This is from a World Health Organization report that has been studying the Chernobyl disaster for the past twenty years, and they've studied the disaster's effect on the population nearby. The real issues of the Chernobyl people were more or less psychological and mental, as people felt stigmatized from society due to being called "radioactive."
The study, in all its glory, is here, and I recommend reading it if you have fears. Also, remember, we're not even close to Japan. I'm guessing (although I don't have proof at this point) that the WWII bombs were far more dangerous because they contained much higher levels of radioactive materials, and they were NOT contained - plus they were meant to disperse as much devastation in as wide of a radius as possible.
Trufax: If you really want to be afraid of something that will give you cancer, you should really be looking more at the foods you're eating. Those are bigger causes of death/destruction than any radiation from Japan.
Just my two cents.
- Nov 12, 2008
- 14,153
- 1,334
- 0
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/so/sp
This might unnerve you at first, but it's actually reassuring. there is actually a lot of radiation around us at all times. It's called background radiation. It comes from natural elements, and from space. It's actually bad to be completely shielded from radiation, because our biology is made as such as to encorporate and deal with low levels of it into our processes.
Here is background radiation, visualized. There's more then you think, and it's completely harmless:
[YOUTUBE]Efgy1bV2aQo[/YOUTUBE]
Here is background radiation, visualized. There's more then you think, and it's completely harmless:
[YOUTUBE]Efgy1bV2aQo[/YOUTUBE]
- Nov 12, 2008
- 14,153
- 1,334
- 0
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/so/sp
By the way, you all do realize that we've already had a partial meltdown of a nuclear reactor plant in the United States?
It was called Three Mile Island, and it occurred in 1979 in the state of Pennsylvania (I was 11 at the time). There's a long study done on that as well, in the following pdf file (see below). Conclusions were, more or less, that no discernible rise in cancers occurred since 1979 - but those that did occur, may have been due to the stress of living by TMI.
Report is here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1405170/pdf/amjph00206-0049.pdf
It was called Three Mile Island, and it occurred in 1979 in the state of Pennsylvania (I was 11 at the time). There's a long study done on that as well, in the following pdf file (see below). Conclusions were, more or less, that no discernible rise in cancers occurred since 1979 - but those that did occur, may have been due to the stress of living by TMI.
Report is here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1405170/pdf/amjph00206-0049.pdf
The only way? What about shielding oneself behind thick layers of lead?
Couldn't these slightly elevated but still safe radiation levels actually be a good thing?
Although still somewhat controversial, there is a fair amount of evidence supporting the concept of Hormesis.
Studies have shown that those exposed to abnormally low levels of radiation are less healthy, have more cancer, and don't live as long as those exposed to the normal background levels of radiation.
- Nov 12, 2008
- 14,153
- 1,334
- 0
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/so/sp
Oh well yeah sheilding like that does help too. Being indoors actually can be effective to a degree as well. Not many people have nuke shelters anymore though.
Oh lord. I was waiting for someone to bring up hormesis. I don't know enough on the subject in order to have an opinion on it.
- Mar 17, 2010
- 4,872
- 1,225
- 766
- MBTI
- ????
- Enneagram
- 9w1
Of course when the bomb was dropped on them there wasn't any radiation leaking over to california...
Just sayin'.
Yeah, only over 100 atmospheric tests. Nothing too serious.
Just sayin'.
Yeah, only over 100 atmospheric tests. Nothing too serious.
I was alive when Chernobyl happened and I live like a 650 miles from it according to some sources, will have check it, but it's surely a lot less than the distance from Japan to west coast of America. We could measure some radiation here, and it is said that we had had some exposure but it ended on that for us. And Chernobyl was way worse than this.
People who write news articles and make videos about about all this have very limited or no knowledge at all about nuclear power plants or accidents in them, and way they should be handled. This results in a lot of misinformation, inaccurate and panic spreading news.
I worked in a combined power and utility company as an maintenance engineer, so you could say that I do have some knowledge of emergency protocols. They really seem to be doing what they should, it's a complicated situation and solutions have to be creative. I suggest you do some reading about nuclear power plants and the way they work, the difference between this and Chernobyl case, and you might get the picture why you shouldn't fear that what happens in Japan will affect you in any meaningful way than some learning about the ways of nuclear plants work.
Here's a very good link in my opinion:
http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/13/fukushima-simple-explanation/
EDIT:
[MENTION=963]myself[/MENTION]
I just saw that you posted the same link on the first page as I did, and I'm curious to see why you think this link serves your point that people should fear significant radiation reaching US?
People who write news articles and make videos about about all this have very limited or no knowledge at all about nuclear power plants or accidents in them, and way they should be handled. This results in a lot of misinformation, inaccurate and panic spreading news.
I worked in a combined power and utility company as an maintenance engineer, so you could say that I do have some knowledge of emergency protocols. They really seem to be doing what they should, it's a complicated situation and solutions have to be creative. I suggest you do some reading about nuclear power plants and the way they work, the difference between this and Chernobyl case, and you might get the picture why you shouldn't fear that what happens in Japan will affect you in any meaningful way than some learning about the ways of nuclear plants work.
Here's a very good link in my opinion:
http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/13/fukushima-simple-explanation/
EDIT:
[MENTION=963]myself[/MENTION]
I just saw that you posted the same link on the first page as I did, and I'm curious to see why you think this link serves your point that people should fear significant radiation reaching US?
Last edited:
SO finally the confusion and panic had reached this forum....too. *SIGH* albeit granted, within the situation of Fukushima, the source itself is really skewed (The main sources are mostly released by the Japanese. Top members.)
I wonder why it's so...detestable to trust the media that has showed at least sufficient* proof towards its reporting.
*) Again given the above, I can see why there are confusions about which are proven, which are covered informations, and which are simply blatant lies, which are paranoia-based. But at least proper science could explain the result. :|
I wonder why it's so...detestable to trust the media that has showed at least sufficient* proof towards its reporting.
*) Again given the above, I can see why there are confusions about which are proven, which are covered informations, and which are simply blatant lies, which are paranoia-based. But at least proper science could explain the result. :|
For anyone interested, this thread has some good info: http://www.intpforum.com/showthread.php?t=9711&page=2