Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Bilow who wrote (63163)	12/27/2002 11:58:40 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) of 281500

Hi Carl, Thanks for the physics lesson. 1.2 x 10^7 Bq/kg sounds so much more dangerous than 1.5 x 10^-4 Ci/lb, doesn't it? -g- However, I find it curious that you don't mention what is considered the chief danger of natural uranium or U 238, inhalation of the dust: hps.org Since U 238 is considered too weakly radioactive to cause real dangers of radiation poisoning, what most scientists seen ti worry about is heavy metal poisoning (similar to lead poisoning) or increased risk of lung cancer due to particles lodging in the lungs. I would think that this would be the chief worry, especially when the stuff is being used in munitions, yet you never mention it. Why not?

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next