Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Cold War's Legacy of Mutation

Posted by michael on from the third-eye-blind dept.

fm6 writes: "Not surprising, but still pretty sobering: Russian communities downwind from cold-war-era surface testing sites are experiencing 50% increase in mutation rates. I'm reminded of Terry Tempest William's term: Virtual Uninhabitants."

6 of 55 comments (clear)

  1. So much for... by Lars+T. · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Is Evolution Over In Humans?

    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    1. Re:So much for... by Stone+Rhino · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Evolution !=mutation.
      Mutation means the random changes that allow creatures to evolve, though that's not all these changes do. They also cause cancer and the like, and are the reason that radiation exposure leads to cancer.
      Evolution involves more than just these random changes, however. It also involves the recombination of these through sexual reproduction, and the survival of the best of them through natural selection. Therefore, the fact that mutation still is present does not mean that evolution will occur.

      --


      Remember, there were no nuclear weapons before women were allowed to vote.
    2. Re:So much for... by Zara2 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Evolution !=mutation. Sorry man, more mutations usually does indicate an increase in the speed of evolutionary change. IF mutations and random change of some sort is happening a certian small percentage of those mutations will be more (or less) useful for furthered survival of that organisms genes. The more mutation that occurs means that there is a better chance of a "good" mutation happening. Especially considering how rare a "good" mutation is. While most mutations will be bad an increace in mutations usually means an increace in ALL mutations, useful and detrimental. The really detrimental ones die off without passing on thier genes. Most traits and mutations dont ultimately matter and may or may not be passed on depending on other traits that organism has. (A non-useful mutation of a third nipple doesn't stop Marky-mark from getting laid.) And that one in a million benificial mutation that can also be passed on is evolution.

      --

      Pithy, yet ultimately meaningless, phrase expressed with gusto!

  2. Happened right here, too. by Deagol · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I don't know about mutations and such, but a few of the Southwest states had down-wind surprises delivered by the Nevada test sites.

    We just bought some rural property in southern Utah. My wife was searching for plant zone information for our area and happened across a link discussing the sterility and cancer rates of people in Cedar City and Parowan. I can't find that link, but a quick search turned up several relavent sites:

    http://www.downwinders.org

    http://www.eq.state.ut.us/EQRAD/fallout.htm

    --
    Method of processing duck feet
  3. Don't forget the US by Hard_Code · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://www.nuclearfiles.org/maps/

    http://rex.nci.nih.gov/massmedia/Fallout/content s. html

    --

    It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
  4. Re:Yet you feel free to use electricity by Mr.Ned · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Nukes are more expensive than just about any fuels.

    Right now, world-wide, nukes and solar cost $.10-.20 per KWH. Solar is so expensive because there just hasn't been enough research into it. Nukes are expensive because, again, using subatomic particles to heat water is really quite inefficient. Coal is about $.08-.09 per KWH. It's in pretty good supply, and will last beyond my lifetime.

    However, hydro power is only $.03-.05 per KWH. That's cheap. And it's renewable. Wind is also about $.05 per KWH. Geothermal is $.10 per KWH. Those are cheap! However, the US government is not putting any money into these projects, as they suggest a distributed micropower solution instead of the current centralized macropower gig - that won't sit well with the commercial energy industry.

    Also, you say 'right now' in your post - it's right now and looking like forever. There haven't been any new nuke plants commissioned since 1979. All orders after 1973 have been cancelled. Nuclear power is on its way out as a consumer power supply.