Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Methane Hydrate Club] Digest Number 547

Expand Messages
  • David
    Forgive me, Leo, but most of what I saw in what you presented consists of the typical anti-nuclear propaganda and hysteria. It s pseudo-science at best, and
    Message 1 of 6 , Apr 25, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Forgive me, Leo, but most of what I saw in what you presented consists
      of the typical anti-nuclear propaganda and hysteria. It's
      pseudo-science at best, and frankly, I ain't buyin' it.
    • XK SAZ
      What do you think these people who live close to the plants are faking cancer? Do you think they evacuated everyone just for the fun of it? Do you think that
      Message 2 of 6 , Apr 27, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        What do you think these people who live close to the plants are faking cancer?
        Do you think they evacuated everyone just for the fun of it?
        Do you think that radiation poisoning gives you cancer or do you not "buy" that either?
        What is there not to believe?
        Some jobs within plants give such a high dosage of radiation that they will only allow
        people to work on them for a couple hrs, then they've hit their limit.

        --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "David" <b1blancer1@e...> wrote:
        > Forgive me, Leo, but most of what I saw in what you presented consists
        > of the typical anti-nuclear propaganda and hysteria. It's
        > pseudo-science at best, and frankly, I ain't buyin' it.
      • David
        ... faking cancer? No. Neither have I seen a study that irrefutibly creates a causal link between the two. How do you know there might not be some other
        Message 3 of 6 , Apr 27, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "XK SAZ" <swezlex1@y...> wrote:
          > What do you think these people who live close to the plants are
          faking cancer?

          No. Neither have I seen a study that irrefutibly creates a causal
          link between the two. How do you know there might not be some other
          environmental factor responsible?

          > Do you think they evacuated everyone just for the fun of it?

          Of course not. Evacuation would be a normal action in case of a
          nuclear power plant accident. It would be done as a precaution. No
          surprises there.

          > Do you think that radiation poisoning gives you cancer or do you not
          "buy" that either?

          Sure it does. So do a lot of other things.

          > Some jobs within plants give such a high dosage of radiation that
          they will only allow
          > people to work on them for a couple hrs, then they've hit their limit.
          >

          I understand that. It's a safety precaution. What's your point?
        • Steve Dodd
          ... Changing the topic a bit, this, but I m beginning to believe the cancers are result of some level of environmental irritation combined with a severe
          Message 4 of 6 , Apr 28, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 11:31:29PM -0000, David wrote:
            > --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "XK SAZ" <swezlex1@y...> wrote:

            > > Do you think that radiation poisoning gives you cancer or do you not
            > > "buy" that either?
            >
            > Sure it does. So do a lot of other things.

            Changing the topic a bit, this, but I'm beginning to believe the cancers
            are result of some level of environmental "irritation" combined with a
            severe inhibition of the immune system and other bodily repair
            processes, an inhibition which seems to constitute a pandemic in the
            Western world, at least.

            Did you read about the professor who's just been fired for daring to
            suggest that there actually is a safe level of sun exposure, and that we
            shouldn't all spend the rest of lives living behind UV-filtering glass?

            > > Some jobs within plants give such a high dosage of radiation that
            > > they will only allow people to work on them for a couple hrs, then
            > > they've hit their limit.

            > I understand that. It's a safety precaution. What's your point?

            Nuclear power plants could probably be pretty safe if run competently.
            The question is, how do you ensure such management?

            --
            Home+FOAF: http://www.loth.org.uk/ OpenPGP: 201A57B6
            Original portions © 2004 Steve Dodd
            Appreciated this message?: http://www.loth.org.uk/tipjar/

            "When the people fear the 'government,' that is tyranny.
            When the 'government' fears the people, that is liberty."
            - Thomas Jefferson
          • David
            ... It is possible. However, consider the fact that people in the western world are living longer now than ever before. Given that, people are living long
            Message 5 of 6 , Apr 28, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              > Changing the topic a bit, this, but I'm beginning to believe the cancers
              > are result of some level of environmental "irritation" combined with a
              > severe inhibition of the immune system and other bodily repair
              > processes, an inhibition which seems to constitute a pandemic in the
              > Western world, at least.
              >

              It is possible. However, consider the fact that people in the western
              world are living longer now than ever before. Given that, people are
              living long enough to develop things like cancer, Alzheimer's, and
              other age-related diseases that they didn't live long enough to
              encounter before. At one time, people died of things like pneumonia
              and polio while in the prime of life. Now, they live long enough to
              die from some form of cancer in their old age. Does that mean that
              cancer is becoming more common? Maybe, but there's a good reason for
              it. That obviously doesn't relate directly to Three Mile Island, but
              the next time you hear somebody say that incidents of cancer and
              Alzheimer's are on the rise, consider all of the factors involved.

              > Did you read about the professor who's just been fired for daring to
              > suggest that there actually is a safe level of sun exposure, and that we
              > shouldn't all spend the rest of lives living behind UV-filtering glass?
              >

              I didn't hear about it but it doesn't surprise me.

              > Nuclear power plants could probably be pretty safe if run competently.
              > The question is, how do you ensure such management?
              >

              I think the fact that the incidence of serious nuclear accidents in
              the western world is very low is a good indicator that the system, for
              the most part, is working.
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.