Slashdot Mirror

Certainly not daylight, but probably quite visible to any decent gamma ray detector. If you did a Google Earth but at the gamma or x-ray frequencies, the Irish Sea would certainly be the brightest mass of water anywhere in the world and quite possibly THE brightest mass of anything outside of the remnants of nuclear test sites.

Well, the one from the NRPB might be a better one to look at. There have certainly been more than 5 cases - indeed the only 5 I could see in this report is to a specific section in the references. The Gardner Report, which DOES mention 5 cases, refers to 5 cases that occurred in a specific time interval over the entire nation where 4 of those occurred in Seascale. The Gardner Report is the one which is the most-cited reference to childhood leukemia in Britain.

In fact, the table at the bottom-right for the Gardner Report is the most interesting for this purpose - a six-fold rise in leukemia incidents in the region surrounding Seascale with levels of leukemia remaining (a) constant and (b) at expected levels everywhere else over the same time period.

Radionuclide research groups *fried* the attempts by BNFL to conceal the link at the time and would doubtless be disgusted by the other posters here trying to attribute the cancers to "natural lead poisoning". I look forward to seeing these alleged papers "proving" that these distinguished experts were wrong and that a pseud-anonymous Slashdot poster is so vastly better and brighter that they can identify a wholly imagined lead isotope as the cause without having done an ounce of legwork.

Other links to papers that may be of interest:

• The Seascale childhood leukaemia cases-the mutation rates implied by paternal preconceptional radiation doses
• Childhood leukemia and radioactive discharges at Seascale
• Leukemia Clusters Near La Hague and Sellafield
• The CERRIE Report
• An index of anything I might have forgotten

The chemical industry sponsors studies to discredit the idea of chemical sensitivities and chemical injury (see Toxic Deception ) the same way Microsoft funds studies to discredit Linux . In one example documented in Toxic Deception a chemical industry study avoided finding a correlation between workplace chemical exposures and ill health by randomly classifying subjects as exposed or not. An EPA employee discovered the fraud when he noticed the same subjects had opposite classifications in different studies.

The scenario described by the parent poster is unlikely. All the studies along those lines that I am aware of use a masking agent to hide the sent of chemicals, not chemicals that don't smell. Such studies can be faked by deliberately selecting patients using bogus criteria, or by using a masking agent that is itself toxic.

Last I heard certain nanotubes were toxic to the environment. Does anyone know whether these suffer from the same issue?

Last I heard certain nanotubes were toxic to the environment. Does anyone know whether these suffer from the same issue?

Last I heard certain nanotubes were toxic to the environment. Does anyone know whether these suffer from the same issue?

another reason to be concerned is that biological effects often manifest at *very* low doses.

take for example endocrine disruptors (substances that mimic hormones in your body). read this excerpt from the Chemical Messengers [That Work in Parts per Trillion] chapter in the book Our Stolen Future:

"What is astonishing about vom Saal's wombmate studies is how little it takes to dramatically change the tune. Hormones are exceptionally potent chemicals that operate at concentrations so low that they can be measured only by the most sensitive analytical methods. When considering hormones such as estradiol, the most potent estrogen, forget parts per million or parts per billion. The concentrations are typically parts per trillion, one thousand times lower than parts per billion. One can begin to imagine a quantity so infinitesimally small by thinking of a drop of gin in a train of tank cars full of tonic. One drop in 660 tank cars would be one part in a trillion; such a train would be six miles long.

The striking lifelong differences between a pretty sister and ugly sister stem from no more than a thirty-five parts per trillion difference in their exposure to estradiol and a one part per billion difference in testosterone. Using the gin and tonic analogy, the pretty sister's cocktail had 135 drops of gin in one thousand tank cars of tonic and the ugly sister's 100 drops-a difference that might not be detectable in a glass much less in a tank car flotilla.

This is a degree of sensitivity that approaches the unfathomable, a sensitivity, vom Saal says, "beyond people's wildest imagination." If such exquisite sensitivity provides rich opportunities for varied offspring from the same genetic stock, this same characteristic also makes the system vulnerable to serious disruption if something interferes with normal hormone levels-a frightening possibility that first dawned on vom Saal when Theo Colborn called him to talk about synthetic chemicals that could act like hormones."

some studies have even shown that as the dose is lowered toxicity increases and as the dose is increased toxicity approaches zero! this turns our traditional understanding of toxicity on it's head.

read these two issues of Rachel's Environment & Health News for an intro to toxicity:

#754 - Paracelsus Revisited, October 17, 2002
#755 - Paracelsus Revisited -- Part 2, October 31, 2002

low dose endocrine disruptors are only beginning to be investigated but compelling evidence already exists that indicates they may have significant health impacts.

makes me also wonder about the myriad undiscovered toxic effects of chemicals that we brush off today as nothing to be concerned about.

another reason to be concerned is that biological effects often manifest at *very* low doses.

take for example endocrine disruptors (substances that mimic hormones in your body). read this excerpt from the Chemical Messengers [That Work in Parts per Trillion] chapter in the book Our Stolen Future:

"What is astonishing about vom Saal's wombmate studies is how little it takes to dramatically change the tune. Hormones are exceptionally potent chemicals that operate at concentrations so low that they can be measured only by the most sensitive analytical methods. When considering hormones such as estradiol, the most potent estrogen, forget parts per million or parts per billion. The concentrations are typically parts per trillion, one thousand times lower than parts per billion. One can begin to imagine a quantity so infinitesimally small by thinking of a drop of gin in a train of tank cars full of tonic. One drop in 660 tank cars would be one part in a trillion; such a train would be six miles long.

The striking lifelong differences between a pretty sister and ugly sister stem from no more than a thirty-five parts per trillion difference in their exposure to estradiol and a one part per billion difference in testosterone. Using the gin and tonic analogy, the pretty sister's cocktail had 135 drops of gin in one thousand tank cars of tonic and the ugly sister's 100 drops-a difference that might not be detectable in a glass much less in a tank car flotilla.

This is a degree of sensitivity that approaches the unfathomable, a sensitivity, vom Saal says, "beyond people's wildest imagination." If such exquisite sensitivity provides rich opportunities for varied offspring from the same genetic stock, this same characteristic also makes the system vulnerable to serious disruption if something interferes with normal hormone levels-a frightening possibility that first dawned on vom Saal when Theo Colborn called him to talk about synthetic chemicals that could act like hormones."

some studies have even shown that as the dose is lowered toxicity increases and as the dose is increased toxicity approaches zero! this turns our traditional understanding of toxicity on it's head.

read these two issues of Rachel's Environment & Health News for an intro to toxicity:

#754 - Paracelsus Revisited, October 17, 2002
#755 - Paracelsus Revisited -- Part 2, October 31, 2002

low dose endocrine disruptors are only beginning to be investigated but compelling evidence already exists that indicates they may have significant health impacts.

makes me also wonder about the myriad undiscovered toxic effects of chemicals that we brush off today as nothing to be concerned about.

I, for one, am very disturbed by the fact that most of the clothes I'm wearing were most likely made by underpriviledged workers, not only in third-world countries, but also here in the US. When the people have a very limited choice, when all they've been given are what they don't want, it's not necessarily their fault if they use it. It is their fault if they don't do anything about it.

I'm just afraid that the overly sensational US media is going to focus on the 20 or 30 idiots who made serious trouble, while the other 40-50K people there behaved themselves. The tension in this country has been growing at a very visible rate in the last few years and I think this is just one of the first (mostly) good outwards signs of it.

Being a (young) 20-something myself, most of the people I know (an interesting mix, seeing as I have both leftist or libertarian friends yet go to a very conservative school) are frustrated and angry about the state of politics in this country. The average person no longer has a voice, and large corporations and government institutions are working hard to make sure we have even less of a voice. Restrictions on encryption, anyone? More wiretapping capabilities built into our hardware and software? The "right" of the NSA and FBI to circumvent due process and keep people under surveillence without a warrant?

The WTO (good article here in pdf) has a track record of leveragaing their power to tromp the soverign laws of independent countries in order to make more money (article here). Powerful representatives from the US and large corporations convince small, developing nations that they need the latest whiz-bang-all-in-one products to even survive in the new world. These representatives then provide tasty soundbites wherein they ask for free trade and villify the protestors for not allowing their poor, starving country to get the best TVs out there (yes, bad example, but you get the point). It's for reasons like this that when I have kids they will never ever have Gerber baby food.

And for everyone who's been saying "Hippie, go home", RTFA (articles) before you make yourself look stupid. Thousands of people from all different walks of life are protesting this, not just a few "burnt-out acid-dropping hippies who crawled out of the woodwork", as much as you'd like to believe that. Middle-aged people who know this is a Bad Thing (TM) are right next to youth who feel they want to make a difference and are motivated to do so. Prominent figures have lent their voices to causes such as this, and the difference is starting to be felt. Previous generations had The Who, The Clash and U2 to send out the call for arms and action against the oppresive elements of their times. Today, groups like Rage Against The Machine are sending out the call to action and education to the youth of today. Do you think it's an accident their album debuted at #1 and is currently the #2 selling album in the world?? I don't think anything short of physical action on this scale (meaning large peaceful yet committed protest groups) are going to bring about the change we need.

Educate yourself. Let yourself get angry. And then do something constructive and meaningful to channel that anger. My 100% support to the protesters in Seattle. Not to mention somewhat reluctant thanks to the police out there for not allowing a re-creation of the 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago to occur.

-jdm