Irresponsible Physicians Oppose Nuclear Energy

Dec 15, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Forbes.com

The Columbia Generating Station's nuclear power plant in Richland, Washington that, together with hydroelectric power, gives Washington State the lowest carbon, cleanest energy footprint in America, delivered with the lowest cost per kWhr of any state.

Comments
1 - 20 of 256 Comments Last updated Thursday
First Prev
of 13
Next Last
litesong

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Dec 16, 2013
 

Judged:

6

5

5

The Columbia Generating Station's nuclear power plant in Richland, Washington, the last nuke that wasn't killed off in the Whoops fiasco & the nuke industry barely saved, rises from the dead to BLAME DOCTORS. The nuclear tri-cities area, the only region that likes nuclear waste permeating through the soils to spill into the Columbia River, spills even more radioactive spiel, heard (AND PUBLISHED) from Forbes offices of propaganda & bad ideas.

Just more proof you can't kill bad ideas, even with a nuclear weapon.

Since: Mar 13

Port Orchard, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Dec 16, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

7

Wow, I wouldn't have thought that even YOU could misrepresent an article THAT much. And to conflate the issues with nuclear weapons manufacturing and nuclear power generation is just plain dishonest. Have you NO shame?

To those that don't want to bother reading the article, it basically describes a report by "Physicians for Social Responsibility" that runs counter to the results of many other independent reports and the failing in the report is easy to identify. The "Physicians" are acting quite IRRESPONSIBLY by publishing that report.
BDV

Stone Mountain, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Dec 17, 2013
 

Judged:

5

4

4

Irresponsible pysicians, agreed. Oil and coal workers and people who benefit from that line of business are reasonably opposed to nukular.

But physicians, who know the toll of COPD, of soot-related cancers, and of poverty on people's health ... irresponsible is a mild word to be using for these so-called physicians.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Dec 30, 2013
 

Judged:

5

4

3

Remember Fukushima lost!
litesong

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Dec 30, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

2

BDV wrote:
Irresponsible pysicians(sic)..... nukular(sic).
... irresponsible is a mild word to be using for these so-called physicians......
......says a nuklar(sic) add-voe-cut(sic)......
BDV

Decatur, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Dec 31, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SpaceBlues wrote:
Remember Fukushima lost!
OTOH, Lac Megantic and every Midwest city in "ozone action day" won. The next free lunch one ever eats will be the first.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Dec 31, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

2

Nuke shill= coal shill.
BDV

Decatur, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Dec 31, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Yes, let me hear again about the evils of nuclear power ... like this one:
http://gma.yahoo.com/casselton-n-d-residents-...
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

4

3

2

However, as experts have warned, the decommissioning process currently being undertaken by TEPCO at Fukushima—particularly at the damaged and sinking Reactor 4 building—is exceedingly fragile.

And as long-time anti-nuclear activist Harvey Wasserman explained to Common Dreams earlier this year, "The potential radiation released in this situation can only be described as apocalyptic."

Wasserman continued:


The cesium alone would match the fallout of 14,000 Hiroshima bombs. If the job is botched, radiation releases could force the evacuation of all humans from the site, and could cause electronic equipment to fail. Humankind would be forced to stand helplessly by as billions of curies of deadly radiation pour into the air and the ocean.[from common dreams]
BDV

Decatur, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Jan 2, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Forunately, the concentration makes the poison. In the vastness of the Pacific ocean, the fukushima radioactivity will be basically undetectable if properly discharged.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Jan 3, 2014
 

Judged:

4

3

2

BDV wrote:
Forunately, the concentration makes the poison. In the vastness of the Pacific ocean, the fukushima radioactivity will be basically undetectable if properly discharged.
Fortunately, your pro-nuke propaganda does not sway the public opinion because you are incorrect.

There's no safe level of nuclear radiation, don't you know?
BDV

Columbus, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Jan 3, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

2

There is no safe level for soot, hydrocarbons, hydrocarbon burn products, and ozone, either.

There is no safe level for vehicular speed, also. Should we stop car travel and vehicular transport, too?

Nuclear power is not done for shits and giggles, but because without man-made energy, 5-6 billion people will DIE.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Jan 3, 2014
 

Judged:

4

3

2

BDV wrote:
There is no safe level for soot, hydrocarbons, hydrocarbon burn products, and ozone, either.
There is no safe level for vehicular speed, also. Should we stop car travel and vehicular transport, too?
Nuclear power is not done for shits and giggles, but because without man-made energy, 5-6 billion people will DIE.
You need to get some elementary education in pollution.

Yes, nuclear power is "done for shits and giggles" and will kill 5-6 B people like it did in Hiroshima and Fukushima.
BDV

Columbus, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Jan 3, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Unfortunately for the peddlers of anti nukular hysteria, Fukushima radiation has yet to kill a single person, unlike say petroleum or natural gas, which accomplish that daily.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Jan 3, 2014
 

Judged:

4

3

2

BDV wrote:
Unfortunately for the peddlers of anti nukular hysteria, Fukushima radiation has yet to kill a single person, unlike say petroleum or natural gas, which accomplish that daily.
You might be immune to these concerns but you are not immune to nuclear radiation:

An estimated 14,000 excess deaths in the United States are linked to the radioactive fallout from the disaster at the Fukushima nuclear reactors in Japan, according to a major new article in the December 2011 edition of the International Journal of Health Services. This is the first peer-reviewed study published in a medical journal documenting the health hazards of Fukushima.

[The authors] note that their estimate of 14,000 excess U.S. deaths in the 14 weeks after the Fukushima meltdowns is comparable to the 16,500 excess deaths in the 17 weeks after the Chernobyl meltdown in 1986. The rise in reported deaths after Fukushima was largest among U.S. infants under age one. The 2010-2011 increase for infant deaths in the spring was 1.8 percent, compared to a decrease of 8.37 percent in the preceding 14 weeks.

Children are innately sensitive to the carcinogenic effects of radiation, fetuses even more so. Like Chernobyl, the accident at Fukushima is of global proportions. Unusual levels of radiation have been discovered in British Columbia, along the West Coast and East Coast of the United States and in Europe, and heavy contamination has been found in oceanic waters.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Jan 3, 2014
 

Judged:

4

3

2

The Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power plant accident

UNSCEAR's assessment of levels and effects of radiation exposure due to the nuclear accident after the 2011 great east-Japan earthquake and tsunami

On 11 March 2011 the Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power plant suffered major damage from the failure of equipment after the magnitude 9.0 great east-Japan earthquake and subsequent tsunami. It was the largest civilian nuclear accident since the Chernobyl accident in 1986. Radioactive material was released from the damaged plant and tens of thousands of people were evacuated.

UNSCEAR is in the process of finalizing a major study to assess the radiation doses and associated effects on health and environment. At the high-level meeting on nuclear safety and security convened in New York on 22 September 2011, the Secretary-General of the United Nations called on Member States to ensure that UNSCEAR has the necessary capacity and resources to accomplish its task. The work was also endorsed by the UN General Assembly resolution 66/70 on 9 December 2011. To date eighteen UN Member States have offered more than 80 experts to conduct the analytical work cost-free. When finalized, it will be the most comprehensive scientific analysis of the information available to date.

An interim report to the General Assembly (A/67/46) was issued in September 2012. The draft UNSCEAR Fukushima Report was discussed by the Scientific Committee at its 60th session (27-31 May 2013). The summary report that is finally adopted by the Committee will be presented to the General Assembly, and the detailed report with the scientific data and evaluation underpinning the summary will be published separately.

Among others, the assessment is addressing the following questions:
•How much radioactive material was released and what was its composition?
•How was it dispersed over land and sea, and where are the hotspots?
•How does the accident compare with those at Chernobyl (1986), Three Mile Island (1979) and the Windscale Fire (1957)?
•What are the radiation effects on the environment and on foodstuffs?
•What is the likely radiation impact on human health and the environment?

Since: Mar 13

Sequim, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Jan 4, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

"There is no safe dose" is anti-nuclear cartel standard lie #1. The evidence shows that not only are there safe doses, but said doses may actually be beneficial. It's called hormesis.

http://www.belleonline.com/newsletters.htm

And by the way, the equation is:

anti-nuke = fossil fuel shill

since the fossil fuel industry spends a lot of money attacking nuclear, its only real competition. Heck, "Fiends of the Earth" was started with oil money. Greenfarce took big bucks from GazProm to stop protesting the Baltic Sea gas pipeline.

Since: Mar 13

Sequim, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Jan 4, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Since the total deaths due to Chernobyl stands at about 60, I suspect that the "16,500" is some absurd hyperbole by an anti-nuke. Heck, sounds like something that joke Yablokov might have come up with.

Since: Mar 13

Sequim, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Jan 4, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

2

"The 2010-2011 increase for infant deaths in the spring was 1.8 percent, compared to a decrease of 8.37 percent in the preceding 14 weeks."

This demonstrates that infant death rates are volatile, as are other such statistics. Your argument suffers from the "post hoc, ergo hoc" fallacy.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Jan 4, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SpaceBlues wrote:
The Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power plant accident
UNSCEAR's assessment of levels and effects of radiation exposure due to the nuclear accident after the 2011 great east-Japan earthquake and tsunami
On 11 March 2011 the Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power plant suffered major damage from the failure of equipment after the magnitude 9.0 great east-Japan earthquake and subsequent tsunami. It was the largest civilian nuclear accident since the Chernobyl accident in 1986. Radioactive material was released from the damaged plant and tens of thousands of people were evacuated.
UNSCEAR is in the process of finalizing a major study to assess the radiation doses and associated effects on health and environment. At the high-level meeting on nuclear safety and security convened in New York on 22 September 2011, the Secretary-General of the United Nations called on Member States to ensure that UNSCEAR has the necessary capacity and resources to accomplish its task. The work was also endorsed by the UN General Assembly resolution 66/70 on 9 December 2011. To date eighteen UN Member States have offered more than 80 experts to conduct the analytical work cost-free. When finalized, it will be the most comprehensive scientific analysis of the information available to date.
An interim report to the General Assembly (A/67/46) was issued in September 2012. The draft UNSCEAR Fukushima Report was discussed by the Scientific Committee at its 60th session (27-31 May 2013). The summary report that is finally adopted by the Committee will be presented to the General Assembly, and the detailed report with the scientific data and evaluation underpinning the summary will be published separately.
Among others, the assessment is addressing the following questions:
•How much radioactive material was released and what was its composition?
•How was it dispersed over land and sea, and where are the hotspots?
•How does the accident compare with those at Chernobyl (1986), Three Mile Island (1979) and the Windscale Fire (1957)?
•What are the radiation effects on the environment and on foodstuffs?
•What is the likely radiation impact on human health and the environment?
Look at the negative icons by nuke shills.

They don't want the UN report, I presume.

Answers to those questions take time and science.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 13
Next Last
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••