MUST WATCH: Nuclear Controversies (full length documentary) 核電爭議 (附中文字幕)

Not well-known, but this documentary goes to the heart of the matter:

Millions of people ought to see this.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Politics and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to MUST WATCH: Nuclear Controversies (full length documentary) 核電爭議 (附中文字幕)

  1. hadia says:

    Thank you Michael, this is really a MUST WATCH. Didn´t know about this one at all.
    From German medical professional literature, reading as follows:(kindly apologize for inadequate translation – since I am not using any translating robots or machines).

    Low dose radiation is a very important issue.There are medical files of a retrospective study on more than 300.000 workers of the nuclear industry (registered by their employers between 1943 and 2005). results of these INWORKS study under IARC. It is proving the impressive cumulative effect of individual low dose radiation, which so far has been regarded as harmless. An increase of the cancer rate is shown abt 48% per Gray. So the estimated mortality rate for all cancers (except leucaemia) has risen with a delay of 10 years – per Gray 48%. For solid carcinoma the rate showed 47%.
    So far one had underestimated effects of permanent low dose exposition, Dr. DAVID RICHARDSON´s TEAM of North Carolina University in Chapel Hill complained.

    °International Nuclear Worker Study. 1.) David B. Richardson et al., BMJ2015; 2.)Nr. 238 IARC October 2015;
    3.) Mark P. Little, BMJ 2015;

  2. MVB says:

    Yes, my impression is that “the achilles heel” of radiation standards is effects of low doses from artifical internalized emitters. Due to the delay (often literally decades, as we’ve seen with Chernobyl), it is increasingly difficult to match one cancer to one specific release of radionuclides. What makes it worse, of course, is that the radiation monitoring situation shrubs those times with fallout from its records (the “data gaps” Ive documented attest to that being ongoing unspoken policy), and thus hides new possible hotspots. And, in turn, thus cancer clusters end up not having little correlation with fallout, not because there’s no connection (that’s already been documented that there is such a connection), but because the radiation exposure data is grossly incomplete. My impression is that they’re doing the latter part on purpose. Proving that, however, is nearly impossible.

  3. Pingback: +24 µSv/hr Spike in Hungary, Data Gaps Amidst Spikes & Peculiar Detections | Allegedly Apparent Blog

Thank you for commenting. Your comment won't show until approved. Sometimes that can take awhile. - mvb

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s