Replies

Oddly enough despite the common perception that the EPA has helped perpetuate that low levels of radiation cause cancer is contradicted by pretty much every study ever done on people who live with higher than normal radiation background levels.

Yes.
Radioactive safety is the victim of “extrapolation at infinitesimal”.
From the Hiroshima studies, a fit line was created to correlate radiation dosage to cancer. That was done using extreme levels of radiation. Extrapolating this line, one gets some cancer risk even for infinitesimally small doses of radiation. However that’s proven wrong many times.
It seems that human body needs some level of radioactivity to function properly. Places with very low level of natural radioactivity have high instances of cancer, while the ones with high level are a lot healthier.
Ramsar, Iran has the highest level of natural radioactivity on the Earth. About 10x what the “scientists” consider safe. About as much as worst places in Chernobyl right now. Yet, it is famous (on Iranian scale) spa with very low instances of cancer!
Apparently we need some radiation!
Earth used to have a lot more radiation during the dinosaur era, and they were OK.
Actually we are constantly loosing some radiation and we will never get it back!

Slow decay of natural sources of radiation is being blamed for reduction of natural volcanism, ice ages and the lack of CO2 in atmosphere.
Volcanos are powered by the radioactive decay, and they are the major source of CO2 on the Earth. As we are, slowly, running out of radioactive materials, Earth is cooling down, volcanic activities are diminishing and so is CO2 in the atmosphere. CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is about 5x less now than in the dinosaur era.

From the Hiroshima studies, a fit line was created to correlate radiation dosage to cancer. That was done using extreme levels of radiation. Extrapolating this line, one gets some cancer risk even for infinitesimally small doses of radiation. However that's proven wrong many times.

I was one of those in charge of a “big city” hazmat team for quite a few years. It was my job to evaluate the risks to my crews and the public from various situations that we encountered and also help plan for possible challenges in the future.

If the past year has taught us anything... it has illustrated how shockingly poor the public, politicians, bureaucrats and the media are at calculating any type of meaningful risk assessment. All the media has to do is throw around a few triggering words like radiation, acid, toxins, etc... and they can manipulate the public and politicians into an artificial panic for fun and profit.

Containers made to hold "hazardous materials" often fail and persons such as myself are called on to evaluate what the likely consequences will be, and what actions shoud be taken to stabilize the situation. It is just a fact of life in modern society.