Dangerousness of nuclear power?

[thibr]

"I will explain to you first how to measure doses of radiation (4:19). Then, I speak of deterministic effects: the effects that necessarily occur for high doses of ionizing radiation (7:48). There are also stochastic effects and in particular cancers (14:18). Much information on the health impacts of ionizing radiation has been obtained through cohort studies and in particular that of the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (18:58) . At 26:41, I will explain to you what we know for doses received less than 100 mSv. Finally, I will tell you about the health impacts of Chernobyl (32:50) and Fukushima (43:42) before concluding (50 : 17). "
the summary

[Bardal]

Well, excellent communication, dealing with real issues, and posing real problems ...

What shame to all those who claim, without any scientific knowledge, or even desire to acquire, who claim to explain us the nuclear horrors and the future of the world ...

[Janic]

your video is indeed interesting like all those that are the result of a conviction or a conditioning. These figures given by this person are, of course, disputed not only by antinuclearists, often former nuclear physicists as well, but also by his direct or indirect victims, so-called counterpowers designed to avoid single points of view. , monopolistic and therefore totalitarian.
Obviously you have not read and verified, by sources independent of the nuk, the book on 'the crime of Chernobyl.' The author has his hands dirty!

[Bardal]

your video is indeed interesting like all those that are the result of a conviction or a conditioning. These figures given by this person are, of course, disputed not only by antinuclearists, often former nuclear physicists as well, but also by his direct or indirect victims, so-called counterpowers designed to avoid single points of view. , monopolistic and therefore totalitarian.
Obviously you have not read and verified, by sources independent of the nuk, the book on 'the crime of Chernobyl.' The author has his hands dirty!

It's called talking to say nothing ... It's a little shorter than usual, it's its only quality ...

[Janic]

It's called talking to say nothing ... It's a little shorter than usual, it's its only quality ...

it's called drowning the fish! So have you read this book "The crime of Chernobyl"? Besides, confirmed by the images taken at that time! it is not 134 deaths but thousands of irradiated people to die of it:
p 139: "The IAEA, UNSCEA, and WHO have incomprehensibly excluded from their statistics the liquidators, still limited to 32 dead, or even 40, after the Chernobyl accident. No follow-up, no epidemiological study in this cohort of 800.000 men exposed to enormous doses of radioactivity. Covered by the silence of official science, nuclear states, the “international community” look elsewhere and simply wait for the liquidators to disappear without making waves. We cannot say that they have been "forgotten" because to forget someone is to recognize that he once existed. NO, scattered anonymously in the 11 time zones of the former Soviet Union, they are excluded from the human community. They do not exist, they who saved us and who simply asked for humane treatment. " followed by the testimony of 6 liquidators.
All rotten!

[Bardal]

There remains at least 6 to testify to this international conspiracy, which you also bear witness, oh how important ...

If you read anything other than the nonsense peddled by obscurantists in need of fame, you would learn that these epidemiological studies, these cohort follow-ups exist, are the subject of regular reports, published by the authorities of which you speak after consensual agreement of the various experts concerned (there are several hundred). The results are also astonishing, paradoxical, since the "liquidators" have a rather better state of health than the comparable populations not exposed (it is a selection bias, not a beneficial effect of the radioactivity), than the prevalence of solid cancers is significantly lower among them (but not that of leukaemias, identical), that the populations that remained, or returned early, in the contaminated areas are also rather in better shape than the evacuated populations, than the fauna (but that is is well known) has never been so well, since the man evacuated the area ... That the 4000 premature deaths envisaged in the long term by the first WHO report do not even seem credible anymore, and that the previous predictive criteria and evacuation decision-making issues need to be completely revised ...

In short, that all that anti-nuclear NGOs have been able to tell (which, moreover, have not, and have not yet, carried out any epidemiological study) are pure, perhaps honest, but more likely pure scams not just intellectuals.

Well, all you have left is the conspiracy thesis ... Look good especially ...

[Janic]

There remains at least 6 to testify to this international conspiracy, which you also bear witness, oh how important ...

are you naturally "stupid" or do you do it on purpose? So in plain language, you have not read this book, but you know better than those who experienced this event in their flesh, including the liquidators in excruciating suffering. but that you obviously do not care!
This book was written live in 1990, among the victims consuming 137 cesium every day on their plate, and again in the juice, not hidden behind a computer to distill the usual lies of the industry.

If you read anything other than the tidings peddled by obscurantists in search of fame,

to choose between the testimonies of the victims and the nonsense peddled by the obscurantists of the nuclear, I opt without hesitation for the victims, of course!

[sicetaitsimple]

to choose between the testimonies of the victims and the nonsense peddled by the obscurantists of the nuclear, I opt without hesitation for the victims, of course!

I have no ability to judge the effects of Chernobyl more than 30 years later, it is certainly the major nuclear accident occurred in the world and it has inevitably had consequences.

On the other hand, when you tell us I am summarizing what I understood "I read a book called" the crime of Chernobyl "and basically even if I simplify" the whole truth is there ", you take yourself a little the feet in the carpet compared to your usual speech on "inform yourself", "study" ....

It's just a book, I'm not questioning the intellectual honesty of its authors, but it's a point in the cloud of points.

[Janic]

@sicetaitsimple »09 / 05 / 19, 21: 22

janic wrote: to choose between the testimonies of the victims and the nonsense peddled by the obscurantists of the nuclear, I opt without hesitation for the victims, of course!

I have no ability to judge the effects of Chernobyl more than 30 years later, it is certainly the major nuclear accident occurred in the world and it inevitably had consequences

Unfortunately these 30 years have erased from the map of the world, the victims in question among the liquidators, only having lived this hell and are no longer there to testify. It's a bit like the shoah that dates back to 80 years ago and that some deny having existed or at least as some describe it. However, it remains all the same those who lived it inside (those who survived) who can testify (since most of the evidence was suppressed by the Nazis)

On the other hand, when you tell us I am summarizing what I understood "I read a book called" the crime of Chernobyl "and basically even if I simplify" the whole truth is there ", you take yourself a little the feet in the carpet compared to your usual speech on "inform yourself", "study" ....

Oh, there, no! I do not have anything at all, and there is no truth here or there, but of testimonys on the spot, people concerned by this catastrophe namely the liquidators and the populations close to this explosion. Even if I lived closely the history of the radioactive cloud stopped at the borders by our customs officers. However, apart from a few rare documentaries using cinematographic archives and direct testimony, the only discourse that remains with the public, it remains the "recognized" organizations that are embarrassed by these testimonies in question.

It's just a book, I'm not questioning the intellectual honesty of its authors, but it's a point in the cloud of points.

This is not a station novel, but a summary of what people have lived in their flesh, not hidden behind organizations that have not set foot directly there, by scientists who have, at the cost of their own life, their health and their social and professional position, lived among these victims, not behind an office thousands of KM away. in the same way, moreover, that there remains only books of testimonys of this shoah: what credit then can you bring them if you did not live it personally?
So, without getting caught up in the emotion, read this book of 700 pages, and of course find out, study the subject, compare the information and then give your opinion.

[Bardal]

It is not the apple pickers who have developed the theory of gravitation, nor the road accident that operates the wounded.

It is lamentable this kind of derisory pathos intended to make swallow any salad; a victim, no matter how moving and respectable she may be, can in no way account for the scale of a disaster, and a testimony remains a mere testimony, nothing more; to use the misfortune of others thus is the zero degree of human solidarity; intelligence too.