Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

NNadir

(35,473 posts)
3. The study offers inferences, not hard and fast conclusions about...
Mon Jan 27, 2025, 08:56 AM
Jan 27

Last edited Mon Jan 27, 2025, 09:44 AM - Edit history (1)

...human health.

It was conducted in mice, not higher species. That said, so was the study 80 years ago on which our radiation regulations are based.

The implication is that the conclusions draw 80 years ago were wrong. (Dr. Calabrese contends they were fraudulent.)

In this study the authors utilized gamma radiation from 137 Cs, a radioactive isotope of cesium that is commonly found in used nuclear fuel, where it is a fission product.

The main thing to be concerned about is the public perception of radiation that has been a millstone around the use of nuclear energy, thus driving the collapse of the planetary atmosphere.

We should avoid foolish interpretations of risk. These perceptions, which are absurd, are killing the planet. I hope this answers your questions. Thanks for your interest.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»The Effect of Low Dose Ra...»Reply #3