| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#12
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Question on ...
On 1/17/14, 10:29 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2014 10:03 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 1/17/14, 9:51 AM, Hank wrote: On 1/17/2014 9:44 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 1/17/14, 9:38 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 1/17/2014 9:23 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 1/17/2014 8:12 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 1/17/14, 7:51 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 00:55:28 -0500, wrote: On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 00:03:03 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 14:24:14 -0500, wrote: Yes it would. Let me know when you finish drinking your product water and I'll come over with a Geiger counter. I have to believe they have good radiation detection equipment on any ship built since the Truman administration. I wonder if the detection/monitoring system turns on when the Captain turns the key, or if it must be turned on when someone gives the order. If you goggle the following: radiation detection aboard u.s. navy ships you'll find plenty of "hits" regarding various U.S. ships and helicopters "irradiated" by the power plant problems in Japan. It's interesting that the Navy is so quick to say that the amount of radiation deposited on various crew members was only equal to a month's average or several month's average, and so forth. Officialdom, be it military, corporate or civilian, has a history of grossly understating the levels of pollutants to which the ordinary folks and workers are exposed. The United States denied for a long time the impact on civilians and its own troops of its chemical warfare programs conducted against the people of Vietnam. It's certainly possible but would require a coverup of enormous proportions. The lawyer is claiming about 70 people were affected in some way, half developing cancer. The remaining crew, numbering well over 5,000 are apparently radiation disease and cancer free. They drank the same water, coffee and took showers with the same water. In order for some crew members to develop cancer or exhibit symptoms of radiation sickness/poisoning in such a relatively short time period, the levels of radiation would have to be very high. If that were the case, wouldn't you expect to see many more cases? Of 5,000 to 6,000 people in the civilian world how many develop cancer in some form? I don't know the answer but 35 out of 5,000-6,000 doesn't seem unreasonable. Ok, I looked up the numbers. New cancer occurrences (of all types) are 463.0 per 100,000 men and women per year. The Reagan has well over 5,000 crewmembers ... probably closer to 6,000 when you count the deployed air squadrons. So, statistically, the reported cancer cases (35) on the Reagan are about 10 more than the national average. Doesn't seem that far out of being normal and certainly not highly unusual. That 463 per 100,000 includes people of all ages, and I suspect a lot of those people are a lot older than Naval crews. And a lot of those people could be a lot younger than naval crews. Are you trying to make a point here? If so, what? I supposed you missed the point, previously stated: "Officialdom, be it military, corporate or civilian, has a history of grossly understating the levels of pollutants to which the ordinary folks and workers are exposed." Note that I am not singling out "the military," but merely including it among those institutions that often work hard to minimize the impact of disasters in which they have had a hand or were the cause. The impact of "overexposure" to radiation sometimes takes years or decades to manifest itself. I don't think Hank or myself "missed" your point. The discussion has been about claims and potential litigation by some crew members aboard the USS Reagan and led by an environmental lawyer against the owners of the Japanese power plant that was damaged in a tsunami. Claims have been made that Japan under reported the amount of radiation leakage and then some people here questioned the Navy's responsibility in monitoring radiation levels aboard ship. You introduced the "point" that "Officialdom" has a history of *grossly* understating the levels of pollutants to which the ordinary folks and workers are exposed" .... with no statistics, or proof offered. Your "point" really has nothing to do with the discussion, but rather an attempt to slant the flavor of the discussion. BTW, your statement that "The impact of "overexposure" to radiation sometimes takes years or decades to manifest itself" can also mean that the immediate claims made by some crew members as reported by the lawyer are bogus. There are tons of examples of instances in which "officialdom" has grossly understated or misrepresented or hidden the impact of its actions in areas "environmental." As of two years ago, for example, the U.S. VA was *still* denying some aspects of the health impact on airplanes crews of Agent Orange used in Vietnam. Has the military resolved PTSD cases in favor of those suffering them? If so, how long has it taken? And in West Virginia, horrific pollution has been taking place for generations, and public and corporate officialdom there many times has been in deep denial and is so to this very day. The Gulf of Mexico rig disaster resulted in the perp corporations lying about the size of the leaks and their impact, and they are still lying. Remember TMI? I had a small subcontract from an NRC contractor to do some copy editing on sections of the recommendations of what to do if it happened again. The contractor was recommending that people in the area leave "in an orderly fashion" in directions to avoid wind blowing from a nuclear site. I kid you not. One of my margin notes said, "What if the wind changes direction?" Never heard back on that one. |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Refinish Deck Question , for sailboat ,, for spring ,, Paint question | Boat Building | |||
| Deck delamination, purchase question, how to do the deal .. question | Boat Building | |||
| Newbie Question: 40' Performance Cruiser question (including powerplant) | Cruising | |||
| Seamanship Question 2 pts plus bonus question. | ASA | |||
Threaded Mode
