Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: longnshort who wrote (12880)	5/23/2007 10:20:53 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36921

Relax; it's just a cycle.

To: longnshort who wrote (12880)	5/23/2007 6:15:29 PM
From: maceng2	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 36921

Ionising radiations inside the body are bad for you. No two ways about it. It does not matter if the source of radiation is cosmic rays from the next galaxy, a DU round shot by a G.I, or a dirty bomb exploded by terrorists, or radioactive dust tailings from a mine. Ionizing radiations inside the body are bad for you. Alpha radiation is typically 20 times worse at damaging cells as Beta particles. Beta particles have a longer range and may be more damaging because it may not kill a cell outright and just make it cancerous. It's like smoking tobacco is bad for you. Ionising radiations inside the body are bad for you. How difficult is that to understand? Figure 2. The Schneeberg mines in the ore mountains (Erzgebirge) of Saxony. The photograph was taken circa 1946–47 in the period known as the wild years when the mining techniques were primitive. In German textbooks on the aetiology of lung cancer, as far back as 1879 [21] the term Schneeberg lung cancer is mentioned and the ore Pechblende, dumped in vast quantities on slag heaps as a waste material, obtained its name because of Pech used in the context of "bad luck". (Courtesy of Dr Horst Wesch.)