Radiation hormesis: urban legend?

Tzadeck Member

From: Kinki Registered: 2009-02-21 Posts: 2484

Norman wrote:
Do you actually believe there are areas in Fukushima that are safe to live in? You are aware that the levels of radiation exposure for nuclear plant workers and the public considered dangerous before the Fukushima diaster were "adjusted" following the meltdown, are you not? Well, I guess all of us are given the freedom to believe in whatever we want to. It is just unfortunate for the children in that area who will be attending public schools so close to ground zero because their parents have such an easy going opinion about these matters.

You strike me as someone who has no idea what you're talking about. Let's be honest, you don't know anything about radiation or about Fukushima. You've researched this for less than an hour. It's obvious.

Blahah Member

From: Cambridge, UK Registered: 2008-07-15 Posts: 715 Website

Tzadeck wrote:
You strike me as someone who has no idea what you're talking about. Let's be honest, you don't know anything about radiation or about Fukushima. You've researched this for less than an hour. It's obvious.

Norman is correct that the government recommendations for acceptable levels of radiation exposure were relaxed after Fukushima. However, taken in context that fact is not significant.

IceCream is right about all the rest, there is no evidence of radioactivity-linked health problems after chernobyl except for the avoidable thyroid cancer and the even more easily avoidable public mental health issues stemming from scare-mongering about radiation. I think we've talked about it at length here before when the crisis was actually unfolding (I'm talking about the earthquake, which was of course the real crisis).

Last edited by Blahah (2012 April 02, 12:48 pm)

Blahah Member

From: Cambridge, UK Registered: 2008-07-15 Posts: 715 Website

As for radiation hormesis, the evidence in favour looks tentative and it is certainly not a mainstream theory. The journals which are publishing articles about it are all very niche toxicology journals, and almost all the publications are from one journal, which suggests an editor maybe going a bit wild. There also seems to be very little modern experimental evidence - all the articles are quoting ancient studies. Reading the articles linked so far and from a brief google scholar browse, I think it's safe to say there is no basis for deliberately exposing yourself to radiation for health reasons.

JapanesePod101 Sponsor

bertoni Member

From: Mountain View, CA, USA Registered: 2009-11-08 Posts: 291

Also, the quotes supporting hormesis don't seem to be very well controlled, IMO. I'm not sure why I should believe that one statistic that shows alleged reductions in solid cancers should override all the other bad effects noted in the article I quoted.

Having just come back from a vacation in Fukushima, Aizuwakamatsu, to be precise, I can report that I think it's perfectly safe to live in parts of the area. Some of the food grown locally needs to be avoided, though.

Last edited by bertoni (2012 April 02, 3:45 pm)

Index » 喫茶店 (Koohii Lounge)

Norman wrote:

Tzadeck wrote: