Moving due to Fukushima disaster?

[Isle of View]

The all-to-human inability to accurately assess relative risk combined with an appalling lack of basic numeracy.

People have no clue that they were exposed to more than an order of magnitude more radiation [due to cosmic rays] fleeing and flying back to Europe and the US than if they had spent the same time in Tokyo.

You are overlooking the most vital point regarding the radiation:

External exposure = temporary.
Internal contamination = long term (continual exposure).

So, yes, while those who take a flight or have an x-ray are externally exposed it is temporary. However those who inhale or consume contaminant isotopes (strontium, cesium, iodine, plutonium, americium, uranium, etc, etc) are subject to having their bodies internally bombarded by the disintegrations continuously thus doing far greater damage.

Protip. Lay off the plutonium

and the bananas and Brazil nuts while you're at it.

[Yokohammer]

I'm interested in moving to the Tohoku area, so if any fleeing gaijin leave behind a good job, let me know. I'd prefer non-profits, management, etc. if possible.

Any specialties?
Areas of expertise?

Oh yeah ... and why Tohoku? (serious, non-snarky question)

Why Tohoku? So I can be close enough to continue work on a documentary project about the rebuilding.

I have 12 years experience working with non-profits on energy and environmental issues and currently run an environmental non-profit. I really have no idea if there's anything where my skills directly apply, but am looking.

That said, I have no plow experience and radiation is my kryptonite.

"Documentary" ... "continue work" ...

Possible value in closer networking.
Will send you a PM shortly.

[Coligny]

Protip. Lay off the plutonium

and the bananas and Brazil nuts while you're at it.

Going back to a missdirected debate that was already done many times 2 years ago won't win you any props. This isn't the spiderman franchise, you can't do a reboot if you didn't like the previous ending...

Putting naturally occuring, non accumulating source of radiation in a debate where the problem come from cesium137 and other man made industrial pollutant is beyond stupid. But you are not here to sound smart, just to lay the law.
You get rid of the radioactive potassium K(40) by eating potatoes. Then it goes away.
You get rid of cesium ingestion by taking prussian blue... But you first need to you know that you have ingested C(137)...


YOUR MOM
↑
Exhibit B.

[legion]

I don't remember anybody being that bold even 20 years after Tchernobyl. Arguing the number of total death or the reason for the freakshow in local orphanage was common and already a bit pathetic. But jumping the shark to the whole 'radiation are safe' is creationist level derping...

Nobody said radiation was safe

However the fear of radiation seems to have a peculiar grip on the public imagination, probably due to a combination of bad b movies and environmental agendas.

...and the involvement of the Japanese government and their unique ability to multiply all possible chances of shit hitting the fan

multiplied by TEPCO's incompetence

[deadseamonster]

I thought about moving, but at some point, I decided to stay. The way things are being handled now, one might reconsider.

[Coligny]

I don't remember anybody being that bold even 20 years after Tchernobyl. Arguing the number of total death or the reason for the freakshow in local orphanage was common and already a bit pathetic. But jumping the shark to the whole 'radiation are safe' is creationist level derping...

Nobody said radiation was safe

However the fear of radiation seems to have a peculiar grip on the public imagination, probably due to a combination of bad b movies and environmental agendas.

...and the involvement of the Japanese government and their unique ability to multiply all possible chances of shit hitting the fan

multiplied by TEPCO's incompetence

exponentialamated by sub-sub-sub-subcontractor illiteracy and turnover.

[matsuki]

I don't remember anybody being that bold even 20 years after Tchernobyl. Arguing the number of total death or the reason for the freakshow in local orphanage was common and already a bit pathetic. But jumping the shark to the whole 'radiation are safe' is creationist level derping...

Nobody said radiation was safe

However the fear of radiation seems to have a peculiar grip on the public imagination, probably due to a combination of bad b movies and environmental agendas.

...and the involvement of the Japanese government and their unique ability to multiply all possible chances of shit hitting the fan

multiplied by TEPCO's incompetence

exponentialamated by sub-sub-sub-subcontractor illiteracy and turnover.

...and finally underscored by Japanese robotic work mindset where whistleblowing or questioning anything is unheard of.

[wagyl]

I just lost a previous post through a keyboarding error. Maybe that is telling me that nothing good will come out of making a contribution here. I want to thank the OP for taking a sober approach to this topic, a topic which can so easily elicit an all too emotional response even now.

I realize this is a sensitive topic but I just wanted to get some feedback from my fellow FG'ers.

1. Have any of you moved or considered moving (further south, west or even outside of Japan) due to concerns related the ongoing Fukushima disaster?

I am a little further away from Daiichi than Tokyo is, and while I am keeping an eye on things there is no way that the risk I assess that I am taking is anywhere near enough to make me want to upend my life and start somewhere else from scratch again. In fact, I don't think it would impact very much on a decision to come here and start a new life, either.

2. Have any people you know (Japanese/foreign friends, family or coworkers) moved or are considering?

Nobody I knew relocated, but then again I never had strong ties with the transient population, the sort who could and would leave more easily.

3. Do you discuss this topic with your friends, family, coworkers or not at all?

It is not a topic of conversation now, except rarely on FG but I try to avoid those discussions. As I say, the emotions can be strong, and the discussions don't seem to change anyone's opinion. They result in unpleasantness and nothing more. It was a topic of discussion for the first month or so, especially with friends and family overseas. I put the blame for this on oversensationalised tragedy porn in the overseas press. A major paper in my home country based its reports on an interview with a 22 year old ALT flyjin as he got off the plane. He had even taken a fellow foreigner's car without his permission to get to Narita. This becomes "Japan in panic" rather than the more accurate "Foreign youth with no ties and not yet familiar with how society works in panic."

I am lucky that my mother has a background in handling radioactive materials, so had a better idea of potential risks and safety than other people. She also very sensibly pointed out that I was best staying put, rather than take the risk of trying to get to Narita with continued power blackouts and aftershocks.
My brother, on the other hand, is a bit of a current affairs junkie, and was swayed a little by the reporting in the foreign press. He understood, though, when I said that the Yanks had not pulled their personnel: he regarded that as a good "canary in the coal mine" test even though it turns out that the Iodine tablet issue was a bit of a panic response.

Where I was, there were no blackouts, and as it is a farming community with people having stocked up with food for the winter period anyway there was no panic buying, even though certain items were no longer being distributed. I think the stability here helped me feel more comfortable staying. If you had noticed people leaving, it would be easier to make the decision to go with the herd. I usually try to keep my location obscure here, but I am too close for comfort to the epicenter of the (often forgotten in the middle of all the other events) Magnitude 6.7 earthquake in northern Nagano the next morning. Possible escape routes were limited further by roads being out, and it was a while before I was happy that aftershocks had reduced enough in strength that I could start using kerosene for the only heating here again, and at long last get to type e-mails back to friends and family without having to try to use the keyboard wearing ski gloves. In the middle of that, while learning all about Becquerels and Sieverts along with everyone else, it was very frustrating to have to respond to the demands to justify my decision to stay, from well meaning but concerned friends, many of whom take larger risks day to day in their own lifestyles. As I say, the foreign press did not need to be as sensationalist as it was.

4. Has it (thoughts on moving, food safety, etc) been a source of conflict with your spouse and/or family?

♪See me, single and free, no tears no fears what I want to be.♪

...and finally underscored by Japanese robotic work mindset where whistleblowing or questioning anything is unheard of.

Whistleblowing has been doing some citizens of "the last superpower standing" a lot of good lately, too.

[Coligny]

4. Has it (thoughts on moving, food safety, etc) been a source of conflict with your spouse and/or family?

♪See me, single and free, no tears no fears what I want to be.♪

♪and a bit th3 ghey♪♪♪...

[matsuki]

...and finally underscored by Japanese robotic work mindset where whistleblowing or questioning anything is unheard of.

Whistleblowing has been doing some citizens of "the last superpower standing" a lot of good lately, too.

When it comes to nuclear plants and such, I'd definitely trust that the type of shit TEPCO got away with would have been exposed in the US.

My cousin lives right by here...

http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local ... 79171.html

Best guess is if the same problem was discovered in Japan, it would be covered up til shit hit the fan with the excuse of "think of all the people it keeps employed."

When it comes to governments, I don't think the question is if there is corruption, it's just a matter of measuring how much there is.

[wagyl]

...and finally underscored by Japanese robotic work mindset where whistleblowing or questioning anything is unheard of.

Whistleblowing has been doing some citizens of "the last superpower standing" a lot of good lately, too.

When it comes to nuclear plants and such, I'd definitely trust that the type of shit TEPCO got away with would have been exposed in the US.

My cousin lives right by here...

http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local ... 79171.html

Best guess is if the same problem was discovered in Japan, it would be covered up til shit hit the fan with the excuse of "think of all the people it keeps employed."

When it comes to governments, I don't think the question is if there is corruption, it's just a matter of measuring how much there is.

Choko Cousin lives in a nice Orange County beachside community (or is a marine in Camp Pendleton)!!!! I didn't realise that they were closing San Onofre down. One of the most annoying friends demanding to know my reasons for not running away lives practically in San Onofre's shadow as well, whereas Daiichi to my genkan is 250Km or so.

And Choko, I let a lot of your statements just flow by, but I am starting to worry that if you repeat them often enough you will start believing them yourself. I am not in any way saying that things are perfect here, because we all knew that they never are, but if things were as bad as you seem to make out Monju would have been allowed to make a better return on investment than it has.

Oh, and Coligny: it is customary to add "not that there is anything wrong with that" so that we can know that his sexuality is a relevant issue here.

[Russell]

The problem with Fukushima is not the knowns but the unknowns, the latter being:

1. Uncertainty whether food products have safe radioactive levels

2. Uncertainty how the situation of Daiichi will develop in the next 4 decades

So, Wagyl, tell me, to what extent do you agree with this opinion?

[Coligny]

I believe the proper sayin' is:
"Not that there is anything wrong with those people, it's not like if they can marry or have kids of their own"

(House in Verdun was next to the church... Mass in Latin and all...)

[wagyl]

The problem with Fukushima is not the knowns but the unknowns, the latter being:

1. Uncertainty whether food products have safe radioactive levels

2. Uncertainty how the situation of Daiichi will develop in the next 4 decades

So, Wagyl, tell me, to what extent do you agree with this opinion?

I agree that we need to maintain vigilance. To some it may look like I have made my decision and closed my ears to any new voices, but that is not the case. I think that I might well have struggled more with making my decisions if I had a family to support or young children to raise in this environment, and I do not criticise anyone for making their own decisions about how they respond. I do, however, take issue with people on other continents telling people what to believe and what to do. I similarly take issue with Jehovah's Witnesses.

When it comes to food, I do have nagging doubts about where the ingredients in commercial food comes from. But I must say that I probably worry more about crops fertilised with disease laden nightsoil (or, indeed, dairy products "fortified" with melamine) from China than I do about radiation in food. In fact, I have enough worries about normal misconduct here, that I still boycott Yukijirushi and its various rebrandings, so I am aware that there are very real problems. These problems were here irrespective of any radiation issue, and I am not yet convinced that radiation has added in any significant respect to the pre-existing risk. And the big problem that comes up in these kind of discussions is the cries of "there is no safe level of radiation" which is ridiculous because there always was and always will be background radiation, from the beginning of time, but even more so not helped by events at Bikini Atoll and (not looking at any member here in particular, because the actions of a sovereign nation are not necessarily the actions of a person who just happened to be born there) Moruroa. Yes, it would have been better if there had been no accident at the power plant, and no, I am not giving anyone a medal for the way that they administered things after the events (or before, even), but I still can't help thinking that there is a level of scapegoating, pointing at a bogeyman which is out of proportion to the damage actually done. I am also pissed off with the world for ignoring the real tragedy of the massive earthquake and the tsunami with real human suffering, just so that it can get all excited about an invisible menace in a foreign land. There is a faint but sharp whiff of "those inscrutable orientals with their shifting ethics standards, their success was undeserved and now their land is a wasteland for generations" schadenfreude behind all this. Sure, that is an exaggeration, but not much of one.

Few people recognise the fact that standards for radioactivity in food were already very strict here, so food exceeding the standards here is allowed for human consumption elsewhere.

Russell, I am sorry but "Uncertainty how the situation of Daiichi will develop in the next 4 decades" is very wide and I am not sure what aspect you are asking me to address. Thank you for having an interest in my views. To me, the big issue with all nuclear power generation was what to do with the waste fuel, and that issue was here before and with luck this accident can help the world move closer to finding a solution, an issue they have all been postponing for 50 years or more.

[omae mona]

Russell, I think you're addressing what Donald Rumsfeld once referred to as the "unknown unknowns".

Personally, I believe current science provides the best explanation, at the moment, for how the world works. Of course there's a chance that scientists got things wrong, but there's a much better chance they're right. I believe current public information about health effects of Fukushima is the most likely to be accurate. Of course it could turn out to be wrong (or intentionally manipulated, etc.), but there's a much better chance it's right. There's almost no chance that it's wrong enough to cause high health risk to me or anybody I know.

I find it impossible to plan life around the "unknown unknowns". I can't criticize those who do, as it's a personal choice. But I find it utterly baffling when people turn to that paranoid philosophy only for Fukushima radiation, and not for any other aspects of their life. We don't know all the testing of artificial sweeteners might turn out to be wrong and they could give us cancer, yet most people worried about Fukushima still eat them. We don't know the research proving safety of mobile phone signals won't turn out to be wrong, resulting in brain cancer for phone users, yet most people worried about Fukushima still use mobile phones. We don't know that our understanding of gravity might turn out to be wrong, and gravity is in fact a temporary phenomenon which will end around September 2013, yet nobody worried about Fukushima is bolting their feet to the ground to avoid flying off into space.

Wagyl summed up very nicely what is also my main thought:

I am not yet convinced that radiation has added in any significant respect to the pre-existing risk.

It's a drop in the bucket compared to other health risks we know about and face every day. To the degree you believe we might end up surprised, and the health risks from Fukushima might turn out to be much worse than anybody knows now, I think you should be equally paranoid about unknown health risks stemming from all other parts of your environment.

The people at TEPCO handling the current crisis are buffoons, need to be monitored, and are not trustworthy. But that doesn't mean there is any reason to believe there is any current or future health risk. This can change, and if it does, we'll have plenty of time to make lifestyle adjustments (like moving or changing diet) before experiencing any meaningful health impact.

there is a level of scapegoating, pointing at a bogeyman which is out of proportion to the damage actually done. I am also pissed off with the world for ignoring the real tragedy of the massive earthquake and the tsunami with real human suffering, just so that it can get all excited about an invisible menace in a foreign land. There is a faint but sharp whiff of "those inscrutable orientals with their shifting ethics standards, their success was undeserved and now their land is a wasteland for generations" schadenfreude behind all this.

Yes, this.

[Russell]

Wagyl, thanks for your extensive opinion.

I take issue with one point of yours, and that concerns the scapegoating.

I think one big problem is that people are not held accountable for professional negligence, and I especially think about (former) people at the top of TEPCO. They were clearly cost-cutting at the expense of safety, while ignoring voices warning them. That is hard to stomach for me.

Finally regarding your question about the developments in the next 4 decades, there is a lot of things that have to be done.

1. Making sure that the flow of radioactive water into the sea stops. This is not a trivial problem. Just constructing a barrier between the reactors and the sea will only make water levels rise, because there is a constant flow of groundwater from the mountains (1000 tons a day). So, eventually these barriers will overflow, making them useless. Even worse, the soil under the reactors may soften, causing problems with the structural integrity of the buildings.

2. Making sure that all radioactive waste is removed from the storage pools and reactor vessels without incident. We are talking here about a huge amount of highly radioactive materials. This is a very high-risk operation.

In the other thread (Fukushima disaster etc) I posted some articles and links going into more detail.

Omae mona, I am personally not extremely worried about the food, though I avoid products east of Nagoya as much as possible. There has been too many incidents with food labeling to feel secure in this area. I admit that other countries have problems too. A couple of months ago there was this huge problem with horse meat labeled as beef (and even worse, very old and often rotten horse meat sold as fresh or mixed with other meat). That was the EU, and to be more specific, it was a company in Holland at the base of the problem. But the realization that it happens elsewhere doesn't mean that I should not be worried in Japan. Nevertheless, I will eat in restaurants, even if they are in Tokyo, where I often go, but it is better to limit exposure as much as possible when one can avoid risks.

Regarding the element of racism, sorry, but that doesn't work for me. I know enough Japanese people who are seriously concerned about the situation and ashamed that their country fucks things up so much. I am equally worried, and that has nothing to do with race.

To sum things up, it is the potential for a high-grade disaster occurring sometime in the next 4 decades that worries me. I will not move from Japan because of it, and I will not decrease the frequency of business trips to Kanto, but it is good to be aware of the risk, and it is better to make people aware so that eventually there is some pressure on politicians to take safety serious. Thinking that the worst of this disaster is over is a clear mistake in my opinion. The situation is still volatile, and it will stay so for the foreseeable future, because of the long time scales at which nuclear materials emit their energy.

[Coligny]

I find it impossible to plan life around the "unknown unknowns". .

That's the concept, like a catch 22 or a division by 0...

I can't criticize those who do, as it's a personal choice.

You can't prepare what you can't conceptualize and therefore can't anticipate... Hence the "unknown unknown".

But I find it utterly baffling when people turn to that paranoid philosophy only for Fukushima radiation, and not for any other aspects of their life.
We don't know all the testing of artificial sweeteners might turn out to be wrong and they could give us cancer, yet most people worried about Fukushima still eat them. .

aren't you assuming for others only what allows you to be baffled.
And now let me assume that if they worry against fukushima and monsanto's GMOs you put them in the tinfoil hat people basket...

We don't know the research proving safety of mobile phone signals won't turn out to be wrong, resulting in brain cancer for phone users, yet most people worried about Fukushima still use mobile phones.

Maybe because unlike fukushima... There is some sort of usefulness in mobile phones... It's a personnal choice that can be clearly made. If i have a phone in my hand, i might be exposing myself to a potential risk, else, not.
Also no mobile phone direcly killed Marie Currie yet...

We don't know that our understanding of gravity might turn out to be wrong, and gravity is in fact a temporary phenomenon which will end around September 2013, yet nobody worried about Fukushima is bolting their feet to the ground to avoid flying off into space.

And then all remaining reason helicoptered into the aether...

Wagyl summed up very nicely what is also my main thought:

I am not yet convinced that radiation has added in any significant respect to the pre-existing risk.

C137... The new unobtainium, the more you release the more nothing change... Finally an effective remedy to cure entropy...

It's a drop in the bucket compared to other health risks we know about and face every day. To the degree you believe we might end up surprised, and the health risks from Fukushima might turn out to be much worse than anybody knows now, I think you should be equally paranoid about unknown health risks stemming from all other parts of your environment.

Let me see if I understand this with an analogy... "Why put your seatbelt since you can be mauled by a bear anyway" ?

The people at TEPCO handling the current crisis are buffoons, need to be monitored, and are not trustworthy. But that doesn't mean there is any reason to believe there is any current or future health risk.

If there is no risk, why monitor them. You are not big on the whole "making sense" concept.

there is a level of scapegoating, pointing at a bogeyman which is out of proportion to the damage actually done. I am also pissed off with the world for ignoring the real tragedy of the massive earthquake and the tsunami with real human suffering, just so that it can get all excited about an invisible menace in a foreign land. There is a faint but sharp whiff of "those inscrutable orientals with their shifting ethics standards, their success was undeserved and now their land is a wasteland for generations" schadenfreude behind all this.

Yea, we are all putting our panties in a twist on fukushima because we are jealous of the yellow peril...
These diversion are running out of steam fast...

Aboot the bolded part... Nothing... Just a perfect summary of the trainwreck... Denying even logic... And i thought creationists were over the top...

[eddie]

if anyone's moving and has a good job, can i replace you? would love to move back...

(i didn't move because of fukushima, btw. moved in 2010

[omae mona]

Let me see if I understand this with an analogy... "Why put your seatbelt since you can be mauled by a bear anyway" ?

Wrong analogy. "Why have you spent money buying bulletproof vests to walk around deep in the forest with no humans within miles, when you're surrounded by hungry bears and haven't done anything about them?" is more apt.

The fact that you think the actually high risk of injury in a car accident compared with the extremely minor inconvenience of putting on a seatbelt is anything like comparing the risk of getting sick from Fukushima radiation (zero, as far as anybody knows) to the MAJOR inconvenience of not living where you would want to be for career reasons, is once again "exhibit A". The risks are off by orders of magnitude, and the costs of the safety measure are off by orders of magnitude.

I realize that for you personally, as you never leave your house, it does not matter where you live. For other people, it matters. So treating a relocation choice as similar to fastening your seatbelt, especially when dealing with a borderline imaginary risk and ignoring hundreds of other real risks, is twisted.

[matsuki]

Choko Cousin lives in a nice Orange County beachside community (or is a marine in Camp Pendleton)!!!! I didn't realise that they were closing San Onofre down. One of the most annoying friends demanding to know my reasons for not running away lives practically in San Onofre's shadow as well, whereas Daiichi to my genkan is 250Km or so.

Both my suppliers are located down there as well, have been there more times than I can count...very nice area! The giggles the two titties of San Onofre have induced on anyone that passes them will be missed. (Usually pretty cool to see all the heli's and jets in the area as well)

San-Onofre[1].jpg

nuclear boobies!! (how did Japan not adopt this design?)

And Choko, I let a lot of your statements just flow by, but I am starting to worry that if you repeat them often enough you will start believing them yourself. I am not in any way saying that things are perfect here, because we all knew that they never are, but if things were as bad as you seem to make out Monju would have been allowed to make a better return on investment than it has.

Haha, I tend to overstate things but let's just say I'm not entrenched in and "beliefs" and given reasonable evidence, have changed my views on plenty of topics on here. Hell, many of the topics aren't static issues to begin with.

Yeah, keeping Monju offline is definitely a tick in Japan's favor but wouldn't you agree the track record of corporate cover ups, government collusion, Japanese social hierarchy norms, mislabeled foods, and extremely poor/inadequate resolutions to disasters while refusing outside help makes the handling of the Fukushima situation more of a concern than it would if it was taking place in other countries? Obviously the level of concern is debatable but considering all those factors and the challenges that are at hand, I'm not too confident that the situation will be resolved as smoothly or quickly as TEPCO/J-gov is claiming while they dismiss concerns. Obviously if I thought the risk was beyond reasonable, I wouldn't still be here, but I think it's reasonable to be concerned and critical of the handling of Fukushima.

[Iraira]

nuclear boobies!! (how did Japan not adopt this design?)

Been awhile since I ventured that deep into the bubble, but I remember that there are flashing red lights on top of the twin boobs of San Onofre...really only visible at night. Metaphor for life: underneath the huge boobs be something potentially dangerous unless handled with extreme caution.

[Isle of View]

Let me see if I understand this with an analogy... "Why put your seatbelt since you can be mauled by a bear anyway" ?

Wrong analogy. "Why have you spent money buying bulletproof vests to walk around deep in the forest with no humans within miles, when you're surrounded by hungry bears and haven't done anything about them?" is more apt.

The fact that you think the actually high risk of injury in a car accident compared with the extremely minor inconvenience of putting on a seatbelt is anything like comparing the risk of getting sick from Fukushima radiation (zero, as far as anybody knows) to the MAJOR inconvenience of not living where you would want to be for career reasons, is once again "exhibit A". The risks are off by orders of magnitude, and the costs of the safety measure are off by orders of magnitude.

I realize that for you personally, as you never leave your house, it does not matter where you live. For other people, it matters. So treating a relocation choice as similar to fastening your seatbelt, especially when dealing with a borderline imaginary risk and ignoring hundreds of other real risks, is twisted.

Bingo.

If there's one thing that many people do very poorly, it is to assess relative risk.

I recall reading that on the US East Coast, potassium iodide pills were sold out after the Fukushima incident,
so while no one died from non-existent radiation, some may have died from renal failure.

[Coligny]

Let me see if I understand this with an analogy... "Why put your seatbelt since you can be mauled by a bear anyway" ?

Wrong analogy. "Why have you spent money buying bulletproof vests to walk around deep in the forest with no humans within miles, when you're surrounded by hungry bears and haven't done anything about them?" is more apt.

The fact that you think the actually high risk of injury in a car accident compared with the extremely minor inconvenience of putting on a seatbelt is anything like comparing the risk of getting sick from Fukushima radiation (zero, as far as anybody knowsas far as i prefer to believe since it fit better my current standpoint) to the MAJOR inconvenience of not living where you would want to be for career reasons, is once again "exhibit A". The risks are off by orders of magnitude, and the costs of the safety measure are off by orders of magnitude.

I realize that for you personally, as you never leave your house, it does not matter where you live. For other people, it matters. So treating a relocation choice as similar to fastening your seatbelt, especially when dealing with a borderline imaginary risk and ignoring hundreds of other real risks, is twisted.

Bingo.

If there's one thing that many people do very poorly, it is to assess relative risk.

you guys should make baybees together...

The fact that you think the actually high risk of injury in a car accident compared with the extremely minor inconvenience of putting on a seatbelt is anything like comparing the risk of getting sick from Fukushima radiation

one case is pre-emptiv to an accident, the other is a reaction after an accident... so effectively... that was a bad example...

to put you into a better metaphor but not by much... that would be like saying that you avoid putting your seatbelt since you can escape the car faster if it burns after a crash... the sequence of related events is a bit better in this one though...

I recall reading that on the US East Coast, potassium iodide pills were sold out after the Fukushima incident,
so while no one died from non-existent radiation, some may have died from renal failure.

So, since it's assume-free-for-all day, I assume that you are also against polio vaccine ? since it can give you polio...

[Isle of View]

. . .

So, since it's assume-free-for-all day, I assume that you are also against polio vaccine ? since it can give you polio...

The French have a reputation for logic and rational thought, but there's always a 6 sigma outlier on the lower tail of the distribution.

[omae mona]

The French have a reputation for logic and rational thought, but there's always a 6 sigma outlier on the lower tail of the distribution.

If he understood probability distributions well enough to grasp your joke, I am pretty sure we would not be having this entire discussion of radiation health risks in the first place.

[Coligny]

Reality shapes statistics... It's not the other way around... It's a excessively flawed and limited tool. and maybe the best demonstration of what 'garbage in, garbage out' can mean. Few recurring numbers displayed on a calculator screen don't means you a righter by the minute... Just that you managed to find more twist to support your view.
Sometimes, putting down the spreadsheet and opening the window allows for a better view of the incoming flood predicted unpossible by the numbers...

It's the same approach that was used to justify not upping the seawalls from Daichi... But Tepco's corporate policy seems to have their head so far up their asses that they seems to be wearing them as hats...

IN OTHER WORDS:

It's stats and probability that set us deep in this shit from the first place. So it's only natural that they are also used to justify that everything is fine and dandy. Like guns, the problem is not the tool but the intent of the person who use it...

[Isle of View]

The French have a reputation for logic and rational thought, but there's always a 6 sigma outlier on the lower tail of the distribution.

If he understood probability distributions well enough to grasp your joke, I am pretty sure we would not be having this entire discussion of radiation health risks in the first place.

True.

Subsequent posts only serve to confirm that not only does our resident mangeur de merde have no clue, he has absolutely no clue that he has no clue.

[Coligny]

Don't forget to drop by when you're done with name calling and beaten-dead-horse level argument...

I won't ask what mathematical marvel that makes radiation and Daichi safe for the whole country. I'v seen you guys play that one before, using maths like a hobo use a streetlight for support instead of enlightenment...

[omae mona]

I won't ask what mathematical marvel that makes radiation and Daichi safe for the whole country.

The "mathematical marvel" is the specific numbers measuring radiation levels, compared with the amount of radiation it takes to increase the risk of cancer. I know this may sound like fancy math to you, but you probably studied multiplication once in your childhood even if you have forgotten it.

[Isle of View]

I won't ask what mathematical marvel that makes radiation and Daichi safe for the whole country.

The "mathematical marvel" is the specific numbers measuring radiation levels, compared with the amount of radiation it takes to increase the risk of cancer. I know this may sound like fancy math to you, but you probably studied multiplication once in your childhood even if you have forgotten it.

Even then there are people running about with uncalibrated substandard Geiger counters making all sorts of not-even-wrong claims about radiation levels.

One of the funniest was the video of a guy who climbed a mountain in the US Appalachians with an uncalibrated Geiger counter and claimed that the relative rise in counts was due to Fukushima Daiichi.

Blissfully unaware that 1/ radiation from cosmic rays increases with altitude; and 2/ the area he was in was known for it's uranium deposits [I looked it up].

Anyways:

http://s22.postimg.org/u1k089u0h/radiation.png

[Click on image to enlarge. Can anyone spot the one error?]