It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

SCI/TECH: Scientists Say No Level Of Radiation "Safe"

page: 1
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 02:20 PM
link   
A National Academy of Sciences panel has found that no level of radiation is safe for humans. The panel concluded that any dose of radiation, no matter how small, can induce cancer. Exposure to radiation is becoming more and more likely for most people because of the growing use of radiation in medicine. The new findings could lead to changes in medical practices and the levels of radiation allowed at former nuclear sites.
 



news.yaho o.com
The nuclear industry, as well as some independent scientists, have argued that there is a threshold of very low level radiation where exposure is not harmful, or possibly even beneficial. They said current risk modeling may exaggerate the health impact.

The panel, after five years of study, rejected that claim.

"The scientific research base shows that there is no threshold of exposure below which low levels of ionized radiation can be demonstrated to be harmless or beneficial," said Richard R. Monson, the panel chairman and a professor of epidemiology at Harvard's School of Public Health.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


The public and many scientist have believed for years that very small doses of radiation are safe. Many people have been exposed to the hazard and had no idea of the risks they were at. Medical professionals should be particularly concerned. Doctors also should consider the frequency at which they prescribe CT scans to patients as that procedure produces much more radiation than normal x-rays.

Related News Links:
www.foxnews.com
www.cbsnews.com
news.yahoo.com
news.yah oo.com




posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 03:48 PM
link   
The government should know best. It spent alot of time studing radiation effects on often unwilling subjects. From the Trinity test where a ranch family was left in place and monitored, to not treating or testing different treatments at various places like Oak Ridge, Hanford, et al.



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Yeah, I can speculate with some level of confidence that whatever stardards the government applies to "safe" exposure are motivated by economics. Nuclear power companies and drug companies that make radiation treatments have a certain interest in keeping the accepted levels right where there are. Not to mention the nightmare the government would face if they had to go back and further clean up abandoned nuclear sites.



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 05:32 PM
link   
I kinda have my doubts about this statement, how often do cancer patients get cancer again? not very often...



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
I kinda have my doubts about this statement, how often do cancer patients get cancer again? not very often...



What exactly propted this line of thinking??? There are many people who have received radiation for cancer, and later have it resurface.....MUCH more often then you might think. The people who truly beat cancer do so through lifestyle alteration. Everyone has the ability to develop cancer, it takes the right stimuli to trigger it; e.g. stress, environmental toxins, ect. My father died from cancer years ago after it going into remission and then returning again...



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 06:04 PM
link   
I think the severity of the effects of low level radiation have been made pritty clear with the last few wars fought around the world, where DU was used.



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 06:11 PM
link   
guess we should worry? i mean radiation is everywhere in some amount, cant escape it anywhere in the universe.

[edit on 29-6-2005 by namehere]



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 06:26 PM
link   
... i guess that the visit to Chernobyl wasnt so smart after all huh?



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 06:37 PM
link   
You realize, of course that, historically, the world was more radioactive in the past, then it is now, don't you?

Nothing is 100% safe. It all depends on what level of risk we are willing to put up with.



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 06:39 PM
link   
it was more radioactive than now???? u mean the meteors???



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 06:44 PM
link   
I'd like to be having some of what those Apollo astronauts have been drinking all along, because MAN!.. what ever is in that water can sure fight off the cause of radiation!




posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 06:50 PM
link   
... oh yea u mean the moon landing... yea all that radiation from the sun should ov made them breakfast



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 07:20 PM
link   
Now can the dentists get over their insistence on using xrays everytime I go? This is a long standing battle with me and them, as I never saw the need and have taken more than my share of radiation for medical diagnostics.

This has become particularly more a bone of contention living in Florida, since for some reason no dentist will even clean your teeth without xrays first and now they want this new surround view they all have. I don't understand why I can't sign a waiver to refuse, but I am told there is some stupid law that requires it. Does anyone in Florida know anything about this?



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 07:32 PM
link   
...dentists... we dont go to the dentist so often... i only go when i get in a big fight with 10 other people and get beat up... only happened once... dont think that it will happen again... so yea only people who dont brush their teeth and people who get beat up a lot go to the dentist a lot



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 09:22 PM
link   
I've been working around x-ray machines for 6 years now and haven't gotten sick, or felt anything from it. With the amount of radiation we are exposed to every day we all should have cancer by now. You would be shocked by some of the numbers I've seen for the amount of radiation we are exposed to from things like living in a brick house, or 6 hours on an airplane at altitude, or a chest x-ray....



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 09:33 PM
link   
...HMMMM.... just a question i wanted to ask... cuz u worked around x-rays... when i was a little kid i took a x-ray and they coverd my genitals with a little pad it was hearvy... it was that heavy metal that x rays cant see through... and it was sepost to block the radiation so that it wont do anything to my genitals... that was in Israel...
in here when people take x-rays of the lower part of their bodies they dont cover anything.... why???



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
I've been working around x-ray machines for 6 years now and haven't gotten sick, or felt anything from it.



You won't. Nowhere near long enough. Cell changes take decades. It's worth your while - and your health - to at least scan the brief.

www.nap.edu...


BTW - looking4 - great catch.
Thanks a lot - already stole it and posted it on some medical support sites.





[edit on 29-6-2005 by soficrow]



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 09:43 PM
link   
Actually they do. No matter where they x-ray they are supposed to cover up a your waist area with a lead pad.

And I've known people that worked on x-rays for 20+ years when they were young, and eventually died of old age, or are still living in their 60s and 70s and have had zero health problems from being around the x-rays for so long.



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 09:51 PM
link   
dentist... never cover up anything... my friend got shot in the shoulder they didnt cover up....



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 09:56 PM
link   
A dentist doesn't because of the way they shoot. They put the x-ray generator right up against your face, or if not right on it, then right next to it, so the x-ray won't get transmitted anywhere but into your face. The shoulder shot SHOULD have covered him up. When was it done? When I was younger they didn't cover up, but since I was a teenager they have, every time I've gone in for an x-ray.




top topics



 
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join