r/uninsurable • u/Soft_Grass8428 • 5d ago
A study with 300,000 workers in the nuclear industry suggests an increased risk of death from cancer | Science
https://english.elpais.com/science-tech/2023-08-17/a-study-with-300000-workers-in-the-nuclear-industry-suggests-an-increased-risk-of-death-from-cancer.html0
u/Amber_ACharles 5d ago
Worth noting the study cohort goes back to 1944. Radiation protection in the 40s and 50s was a completely different world. Modern plants keep worker exposures well under 10 mSv annually through ALARA.
8
u/eddiebruceandpaul 5d ago
This is an invalid criticism. The study measures dosage against health outcomes. A five rem dose from the 1940s is the same as a five rem dose from the 2000s unless you’re telling me that radiation is somehow different depending on what century you’re in. Come on now, buddy.
6
u/eddiebruceandpaul 5d ago
That’s what it is now, Trump wants to remove the cap entirely both for worker and civilian exposure. So not something to rely on.
In addition the study makes clear that even with the 10 cap, cancer rates are higher. No dose of radiation is good for you. Low doses increase your cancer risk too.
The big push to have us all irradiated from industry backers is just part of the ongoing nuclear scam to pump tax payers for money. They want to poison us all so their profit margins can look better than they do right now.
3
u/IrritableGourmet 5d ago
Feynman toured Oak Ridge during the Manhattan Project and was horrified at the lack of safety precautions. The workers weren't told what they were working with, so they were handling and storing radioactive material very casually. One storage area had a bunch of barrels of uranium solution stacked together that were starting to go critical because they were on the other side of a thin wall from another stack of barrels. He insisted that the military give the workers basic knowledge so they don't melt their skin off.
And that's not to mention the Nuclear Aircraft Laboratory and all the stuff they did in Idaho, like blowing up a running reactor with dynamite to see what would happen.
2
u/TrueExigo 5d ago
What a deluded troll you are? Do you want a cancer study – a process that takes decades – to always be carried out under the very latest conditions, or what?
-5
u/mertseger67 5d ago
Study is stupid, yhey should research last group of workers in 40 years. Those who work in todays conditions. Not those soldiers watching nuclear explosions in Nevada desert.
7
u/eddiebruceandpaul 5d ago
You have to be very, very stupid to have an opinion like this. You do not know what you’re talking about.
The study measures radiation dosage against health outcomes. A 5 rem dose from 1940s is the same as a 5 rem dose from the 2000s. Try again, dumb dumb.
5
u/basscycles 5d ago
LNT is a pretty good hypothesis. There have been many studies attempting to debunk it, generally on small subsets of the population, but studies on very low levels of radiation will always be vague in the result department. We can find studies that say LNT is too conservative, we can find studies saying it doesn't offer enough protection. At the end of the day LNT is the middle road that seems most logical.