Radiation is good for you! (Horizon)

[Mikey1280]

But there is a hose pipe ban over there so you lot will miss out

We'll use buckets instead

 

[philio16]

But there is a hose pipe ban over there so you lot will miss out

Not up north It is free energy pretty much.....the problem is at the moment is containing the massive temperatures needed, far hotter than the sun! They can't escape their containment...it is just that huge forces are also needed. Basically it will eventually replicate the processes that go on in the sun. But as we don't have the capability to produce the huge gravitional forces the sun can, we instead have to up the temperature instead. It has been done, but only for a matter of seconds, we need it to operate continuosly to balance the massive energy input required with energy output.....or something

Interesting reading

 

[j00ni]

Yer, as long as you're like over 100 miles away .

Th programme was looking at former residents of the immediate surrounding area - as well as those involved in the cleanup - and concluded that the exposure was not significant to cause genetic damage resulting in cancer in the vast majority (though rates were naturally much higher in those involved in cleanup - though most of that was acute radiation poisoning)

 

[benjo plz.]

Th programme was looking at former residents of the immediate surrounding area - as well as those involved in the cleanup - and concluded that the exposure was not significant to cause genetic damage resulting in cancer in the vast majority (though rates were naturally much higher in those involved in cleanup - though most of that was acute radiation poisoning)

I'm pretty sure those in the immediate area when chernoble happened also recieved an acute level of radiation .

I did watch the program, and yes, if you recieve low levels of radiation chronically, it seems to be good for the body, but if you recieve high levels of radiation, it's not good.

 

[j00ni]

I'm pretty sure those in the immediate area when chernoble happened also recieved an acute level of radiation .

I did watch the program, and yes, if you recieve low levels of radiation chronically, it seems to be good for the body, but if you recieve high levels of radiation, it's not good.

Yeah, but what it was saying is that those in the immediate surrounding area received a dose of x (can't remember the exact figures) radiation.

This dose was previously thought to be dangerous, but has since been demonstrated not to be the case, thus proving (not conclusively mind) that you don't have to live over 100miles away to not suffer adverse effects

edit: And i never said those in the immediate area didn't receive an acute dose if you reread my post

 

[adamofgreyskull]

nuclear fusion is the next one....all you need is water pretty much, and theres infinite sources of that! it is impossible to blow up/melt down and theres very little waste!

Awesome, be sure to let us know if you ever build your own fusion reactor. I could always do with another reason not to go to Manchester Also curious about this infinite supply of water of which you speak and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

 

[Dtab]

Abortions do not count as deaths. end of.

I dont care enough to get into an ethical debate over abortion,and it is irrelevant to this thread anyway

even if they did, they would not have been as a result of radiation damage, more a result of the Fear of radiation damage.

Precisely,that is what i found shocking

 

[phykell]

Its the only fuel we can use in the near future. It's also extremley safe. A modern power station cann't melt down.

Wishful thinking. Do you think it's only an actual meltdown we have to worry about? We haven't got many reactors now and look at the amount of accidents that have occurred. Look at the way it's been managed so far as well? Do you really trust the various organisations involved because I don't!

Yeah cos Horizon is such a major influence on the publics opinion just one BBC program made by lackies of nuLabour will sway the masses to President Blairs viewpoint.

BTW this program said nothing new.

The sheep that inhabit this country generally only believe the last thing they heard and actually yes, TV is a huge influence on public opinion.

Look at the thread in SC which keeps on getting updated with the numerous accidents and incidents that keep on occurring despite nuclear power being depicted as safe by those whose interest it's in to say exactly that. It's unbelievable, we have safe ways of generating electrical power but once again the excuse used is that the public won't stomach a higher bill. Well guess what, if paying £500 instead of £250 negates the need for nuclear power, I'd be happy to pay it. Not that it makes much difference because the French live pretty close by and they love their PWRs...

Try this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/uk/06/electricity_calc/html/1.stm

 

[Aod]

I dont care enough to get into an ethical debate over abortion,and it is irrelevant to this thread anyway

indeed, thats why i said end of.

i probably should have said statistically not counted...

 

[Amp34]

Yeah, but what it was saying is that those in the immediate surrounding area received a dose of x (can't remember the exact figures) radiation.

This dose was previously thought to be dangerous, but has since been demonstrated not to be the case, thus proving (not conclusively mind) that you don't have to live over 100miles away to not suffer adverse effects

edit: And i never said those in the immediate area didn't receive an acute dose if you reread my post

They were saying less than 100 mSv with most of them recieving less than 25 mSv.

What confused me a little was that i'm sure the graph was meant to show the number of people who would get Cancer not die. I would look this up but its too late at night/
If that is the case then the supposed sums are aall wrong as lots of people who get cancer dont die. Having said that the evidence to back up the fact that low level radiation is possibly good for you is pretty strong.

 

[Energize]

Its been thought for a while that low levels of radiation are good for you, experiments have been done on mice, some were exposed to low levels of radiation some weren't, they were then exposed to high levels of radiation. Many more mice that hadn't been exposed to the low levels of radiation earlier developed cancer than the ones that had been exposed.

As with many toxic substances, low doses of them can have the exact opposite effect of high doses of them.

Also curious about this infinite supply of water of which you speak .

No water ever leaves the planet, so you always have the same amount, and any chemical reaction that changes water into something else can be reversed so to speak.

 

[Meridian]

No water ever leaves the planet, so you always have the same amount, and any chemical reaction that changes water into something else can be reversed so to speak.

But fusing the hydrogen from water turns it into helium, meaning that it is no longer free to form water. In theory you could convert it back to hydrogen, but that would take more energy than you got from fusing it. So your theory that there is an never-ending (not infinite BTW - that suggests that there is an unlimited amount) source of water that can be used for fusion is holed as soon as you start using it for fusion.


M

 

[Redman]

Is this due to be repeated? (The program, that is - not Chernobyl )

 

[aardvark]

i missed the programme, bugger.

nice to know its healthy
i have a big 5 litre measuring cylinder filled with radioactive marbles i bought off ebay - looks really cool with a uv light.

 

[leaskovski]

Is this due to be repeated? (The program, that is - not Chernobyl )

lol, erm im sure if you have a scout around (cough) you might be able to find it.