It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


New NRC study says less people than originally thoght would die from meltdown.

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 10:27 AM
A new 6-year study claims the release of cesium 137 wouldn't happen as quickly or in quantity as previously thought. The new study claims only 1-2% of the cesium would escape where it was previously thought 60% would. Also changed in the new study was the rate of cancer, being changed from 1 in 167 to 1 in 4348. The report also claims that meltdowns happen very slowly allowing resident to be safely evacuated. This is just more "nukes are safe" propaganda. We all seen how much radiation was released, and continues to be released from Fukishima. We also have found out they had complete meltdowns in the first 24 hours. Previous accidents show how bunk this new report is.
edit on 3-8-2011 by wiandiii because: for content

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 10:31 AM
Wow, amazingly convenient how they are just now wrapping up a 6 year long "large nuclear study"...gimme a break.

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 10:41 AM
Timing is rather suspicious.

Yay! nuclear stuff is safe, and good for you too, Try some cesium-o's today, we have 137 and 67 for your consumption.
*Company takes no responsibility for your hair falling out, or your face melting off*

Gives you a healthy glow, no need for light bulbs!

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 11:09 AM
I can see two possibilities of the 'truth' behind this report either:

A.) Their six-year study did not factor in Fukushima and they arrogantly thought 'It's improbable we will ever have another Chernobyl'


B.) "They" are really just not trying anymore. Believing the average American too distracted and uneducated to notice or even care. (Everything is ok....I still have my Starbucks)

I suppose also a third possibility could be:

C.) Everyone else who has published or proposed figures for radiation has been wrong and/or biased?

new topics

top topics

log in