Skip to main content

View Diary: DHS to fund safety study on backscatter Xray detectors at airports (81 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Radiation is funny stuff (0+ / 0-)

    Even today some of the effects aren't fully understood, and people are afraid of the mere mention of it after a couple generations of being terrified of "The Bomb" during the Cold War.

    And we're exposed in ways we don't even know most of the time.  Eating a banana a day over the course of a year will expose a person to more total radiation than a standard chest x-ray (though admittedly over a much longer exposure time - a whole year instead of a fraction of a second), due to the potassium in the bananas.  Nuts and kidney beans, among some other foods, provide some miniscule radiation exposure as well.

    Here's an interesting visual representation to help put things in perspective (be sure to click the expand button to see the whole chart):

    •  Don't you belong in a pro-nuke diary? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ozsea1, magnetics

      Wish I had a nickel for every time I've read that worn-out banana example.

      And no, we don't all cower at the sound of the word 'radiation'. Concern about radiation  science based. "The Bomb" doesn't factor into this concern much at all, as I'm sure you're aware, as much as do the missteps, abuses, and destructive consequences of nuclear energy use. Fukushima, anyone?

      And for the record, I don't consider radiation 'funny stuff', or even a tad twee. Nice try though.


      Life is a school, love is the lesson.

      by means are the ends on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 10:24:58 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Nope. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        You've read more into my comment than warranted.  Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar (and a banana just a banana).

      •  Scientists would disagree with you. (0+ / 0-)

        It is well documented in several studies, one of the most cited being from the EPA, that the public perceives risk far differently than experts do and that scientists generally rank the risk of nuclear power far lower than the general public does. Infrequent or novel events, like plane crashes or Fukushima, as you yourself made a point of mentioning, cause an increased perception of risk in the brain that can be disproportionate to the actual calculated risk.

      •  Have you had your home tested (0+ / 0-)

        for radon? Are you living in a high radon zone?

        That could be a source of much higher risk.

        I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

        by samddobermann on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 04:56:49 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  asdf (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      The effects of radiation are actually well understood for the most part. What gets argued about mostly (for the propoganda rights) is whether there are measurable health effects from miniscule amounts of  exposure that are all but swamped by random statistical noise and are nearly impossible to tease out.

      You are right that we are exposed in ways most people don't realize but the banana example is wrong. Bananas are high in potassium, which means they also contain Potassium-40, a common natural radioactive isotope. But potassium doesn't bioaccumulate and your body will pee out any it doesn't need. Your annual radiation dose will not change measurablu with increased banana consumption. Also, ALL food is slightly radioactive due to the presence of Carbon-14, another natually occurring radioisotope, but your point is still taken that most people are ignorant about their natual exposure.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site