If you are going to understand health effects, you MUST compare radon, Cs-137 or Sr, as well as background radiation.
__________________________________________________________
No. I do not have to compare radon to the recklessness in the nuclear power industry that has dumped 300+ tons of radioactive waste into the oceans since March of 2011, and has poured massive amounts of radioactive waste into the air - and will continue to add more pollution to the air and water every day for an indefinite period of time - at present - until all the fuel waste has been dispersed across the US. If we are fortunate...no...VERY LUCKY...the tons of intact fuel sitting in crumbling spent fuel pools will be stored rather than vented into the air and water in the event that the damaged structure collapses due to earth quake, tsunami, liquification of the land as it has begun to subside under the buildings due to water issues, or gravity - even moving those rods to store them is iffy. Or the site may become too radioactive for humans to maintain. No - I am satisfied that background radiation is addressed - there are radon detectors and rules to minimize the risk and no one is denying it’s harmful just like no one denies sunlight can cause skin cancer and we should use SPF. But RADON is less harmful than the contaminants coming out of Fukushima and Fukushima was avoidable. That’s the tragedy - generations to come will experience the effects of all that waste coming out of Fukushima and it was avoidable.
Nuclear power apologists ignore medical studies dating back to the 50’s proving the risks behind exposure, proving that exposure causes cancer, leukemia and other diseases. They ignore respected studies like the BEIR VII. They ignore that sad petri dish known as the Ukraine, where people born today are exposed to the same radiation that people were exposed to 25 years ago when Chernobyl blew up, and they raise their families in contaminated zones (only high level radiation zones were evacuated, others are forced to live their lives in contaminated zones because there’s no where else for them to live) and deal with debilitating illnesses. Nuke pimps act like all this evidence is non existant and come to this thread and have the audacity to ask, “Where’s the proof?” So hey, if Chernobyl didn’t flick a light on somewhere that maybe it’s harmful for people to be exposed to radioactive waste - what could possibly convince someone, eh? But hormesis? THAT is science nuke pimps can’t WAIT to get behind.
Why aren’t nuke apologists embarrassed to deny living proof (Ukraine) and decades of reputable peer reviewed large scale studies in favor of hormesis? How does one get the gall to portray themselves as scientifically objective and those who cite studies like BEIR VII as uneducated “hysterics”. How can you possibly claim the scientific high ground?