Well I did take years of science, physics, anatomy and experimented with CS-137 but it wouldn’t matter if I had zero formal training in science and radiation - the average American can participate knowledgeably in discussions regarding Fukushima. “specific degreed course in medical uses of radiation as it pertains to humans” is not impressive. I debated numerous “nuclear engineers” and “radiologic specialists” before I realized that neither had ever realized that their dosimetry calculations are irrelevant to the impact of ionizing radiation on human health. The fact that running dosimetry calucations using bananas and comparing those same calculations using plutonium always resulted in the false appearance of bananas being safer than plutonium. The “experts” never wondered how that could be possible or if maybe the formula was wrong. Some of the engineers were sincere - they learned “dose is dose” and they repeat it by rote. While that might be true when talking about external exposure to nuclear fuel with similar energy levels, its completely false when talking about isotopes like Strontium and Cesium etc.
How many cases of leukopenia or skin erythema from exposure have you seen. How many patients have you ever personally touched.
It’s also quite obvious you don’t debate....you parrot preconceived personal
beliefs.
Nobody is saying Fukushima is not a problem and not a danger.
Those of us who KNOW are aware that the danger is limited to a small area in Japan and and diminishes dramatically with distance and dilution to
the point where it quicky becomes a theoretical, statistical risk for 99+% of the people on this planet . For that massive majority the risks from Fukushima are irrelevant when compared to all the other risks faced on a daily basis.
You are trying to act as if the exposure to radiation all humans are exposed to on a daily basis pre meltdown was safe but now the daily exposure post meltdown is a disaster that will cause massive disease and suffering...and that is bullsh*t. Your position is akin to saying that 2 minutes of daily direct exposure to sunlight is safe and acceptable but 3 minutes a day is a clear and unacceprable danger that we must all panic over....when the difference between the two, while measurable is statistically irrelevant in terms of actual risk.
Either that or your just another agenda driven luddite who can spit words and numbers but has no real comprehension of the subject..