posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 01:58 AM
Though DOE insists that the amount of radiation emitted from radioactive waste is "negligible" in terms of being a public health threat, science
says otherwise. Cumulative exposure to even low-dose radiation over the course of many months or even years can damage cells, DNA, and even hormone
This quote from the source not crystal clear and may be subject to interpretation. It is also misleading when the corrections are made.
It should read:
'Though DOE insists that the amount of radiation emitted from radioactive waste is "negligible" in terms of being a public health threat, science says
otherwise. Cumulative exposure at even low dose-rates over the course of many months or even years can damage cells, DNA, and even hormone
Given two identical doses, radiation will tend to be less damaging at low-dose rates, however it is quiet right in pointing out that low dose-rates
over a long period of time will add up to a large collective dose which will cause more damage than a small dose. The current theory is that damage is
directly proportional (linear) with the dose. Therefore, if that dose and dose-rate are small enough, then the health risks will be small (they still
exist) or perhaps some could consider them negligible. Like the DOE.
Or in other words, the little factoid natural-news gave isn't necessarily incompatible with what the DOE says. And since no information was presented
on the actual risk
this poses, natural news certainly hasn't shown that DOE is making a faulty decision. Then again, I haven't looked up the
DOE analysis, so perhaps they are wrong too.
reply to post by Pervius
America spent Billions making that new mountain cave in Nevada to store alll of America's nuclear waste. They haven't put 1 piece of
radioactive waste in there.
Why when they can make money putting it in things? Besides they want to thin the worlds population.
Yucca Mountain was taken off the table for political reasons. The primary type of nuclear waste it was designed to store, spent nuclear fuel, will
remain where it has always been (until an alternative to Yucca mountain is established) - in spent fuel pools and dry storage at nuclear power
stations across the country.
I'm not sure what kind of nuclear waste they plan to recycle, but it sure isn't spent nuclear fuel.
edit on 8/2/13 by C0bzz because: (no reason