convert Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 I'd suggest it might be worthwhile reading the latest WHO update. http://www.wpro.who.int/NR/rdonlyres/6DBC36BA-2512-428F-BA90-53D8EC784740/0/JPNEarthquakeSitrep1120March.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 I'd suggest it might be worthwhile reading the latest WHO update. http://www.wpro.who.int/NR/rdonlyres/6DBC36BA-2512-428F-BA90-53D8EC784740/0/JPNEarthquakeSitrep1120March.pdf Someone pointed out to me that the greatest liklehood of harm will come from China. People here are eating large - perhaps even lethal doses of iodised table salt in the erroneous belief that it will protect them from a radiation threat that doesn't even exist. But that's what you get with reading facts without understanding what they mean sadly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Someone pointed out to me that the greatest liklehood of harm will come from China. People here are eating large - perhaps even lethal doses of iodised table salt in the erroneous belief that it will protect them from a radiation threat that doesn't even exist. But that's what you get with reading facts without understanding what they mean sadly. seems its starting to exist..........in Tokyo as well as Fukishima http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12825342 Tokyo's tap water is unfit for babies to drink after radiation from Japan's quake-hit nuclear plant affected the capital's water supply, officials said. Radioactive iodine levels in some areas were twice the recommended safe level. People in Fukushima prefecture, where the nuclear plant is located, have been told not to eat certain vegetables because of contamination worries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dosxuk Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Someone pointed out to me that the greatest liklehood of harm will come from China. People here are eating large - perhaps even lethal doses of iodised table salt in the erroneous belief that it will protect them from a radiation threat that doesn't even exist. But that's what you get with reading facts without understanding what they mean sadly. seems its starting to exist..........in Tokyo as well as Fukishima http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12825342 My bold - Obelix was talking about the risks to people in China overdosing on salt as a precaution for a non-existant risk. Not those in Japan taking precautions against an existing risk. Anyway, the radiation level is only too high for babies under 1 year of age, who have a much reduced radiation level allowed. Slightly less paniccy coverage here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/23/tokyo_tapwater_fukushima/ Japan's Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare says that tests have revealed levels of the radioactive isotope iodine-131 in tapwater samples in Tokyo that range from 100 to 210 becquerels/litre. The radio-iodine health limit in force for iodine-131 is 300 Becquerels/litre, but there is a separate limit for baby milk fed to infants less than a year old of 100 Bq/l – hence the recommendation. As ever, we hear of "more than twice the safe level", though the BBC does add that "officials have stressed that children would have to drink a lot of it before it harmed them". Indeed they would. As World Nuclear News makes clear, the health safety limits in question are based on a year's consumption: in other words, a baby could drink milk containing 100 Bq/l of radio-iodine for a year without ill effects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 seems its starting to exist..........in Tokyo as well as Fukishima http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12825342 So what you are saying is that you can drink the tap water for a half year without any ill effects whatsoever. That's what that limit means. Since all the iodine will have decayed away within about a month or so, there really is no problem at all. Like I said before - the biggest thing to worry about from this is the fear and panic caused by ill informed speculation and fear mongering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On the ball Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 It's not that expensive - costs for French electricity which is about 80% nuclear generation are far below UK pricing for exmaple. I hope you're not mixing up cost with price. Cost is what a unit costs to produce, whereas price is what is paid for that unit. A number of reasons could cause something to be sold at a price below what it costs to make. For example loss leading, market surplus and subsidies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Again you are wrong. Try harder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 I hope you're not mixing up cost with price. Cost is what a unit costs to produce, whereas price is what is paid for that unit. A number of reasons could cause something to be sold at a price below what it costs to make. For example loss leading, market surplus and subsidies. Price is a starting point in a negotiation about how much the seller wants for something and how much the purchaser wants to pay for it. Cost is to the purchaser what they actually pay and the seller what they paid (to produce or procure the item). The cost of electricity in France to the consumer is lower than the equivalent in the UK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digglydog Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 My bold - Obelix was talking about the risks to people in China overdosing on salt as a precaution for a non-existant risk. Not those in Japan taking precautions against an existing risk. Anyway, the radiation level is only too high for babies under 1 year of age, who have a much reduced radiation level allowed. Slightly less paniccy coverage here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/23/tokyo_tapwater_fukushima/ I am sure your reassuring words will do a lot to calm the fears of Japanese mothers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 indeed its ok for people nowhere near japan to swear its safe, imagine facing it on a daily basis, possibly for years, the uncertanty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.