Subcontractor Tells Fukushima Workers To Hide Radiation Exposure

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Subcontractor Tells Fukushima Workers To Hide Radiation Exposure

Posted by timothy on Sunday July 22, 2012 @06:09AM from the how-to-lie-with-statistics-in-a-big-way dept.

First time accepted submitter fredprado writes "Apparently at least one subcontractor hired to clean up the Fukushima site has been urging their workers to put their radiation detectors lined under lead shieldings. A diagram can be seen here. The authorities decided not to prosecute him, even after one employee presenting them recordings of him trying to talk the said employee into it."

11 of 439 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

seems fine to me by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-22 06:13 · Score: 5, Funny

makes sense; those things are probably expensive and, I gather, are sensitive to radiation. Don't want to risk damaging them.
1. Re:seems fine to me by msauve · 2012-07-22 07:02 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  By similar logic, people should drive at night with their headlights off. If they can't be seen, it makes it harder for other drivers to hit them.
  
  --
  "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
2. Re:seems fine to me by phantomfive · 2012-07-22 11:22 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  By similar logic, people should drive at night with their headlights off. If they can't be seen, it makes it harder for other drivers to hit them.
  Right. I think you're catching on. An extra advantage is, when your lights are on, the light going out pushes your car backwards. That's alright if you want it, but if you turn off your lights, you can literally save gas. And gas is our most valuable natural resource.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Health effects in children by symbolset · 2012-07-22 06:27 · Score: 5, Informative

Thyroid cysts or nodules are being found in 36% of 38,000 Fukushima children. A 2001 study in Nagasaki found an incidence of 0%. Thyroid is associated with iodine, as the substance is essential to its function. Iodine-131 was a considerable component of the contaminants released in the incident.

--
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Re:This is why we need more unions and more worker by jfengel · 2012-07-22 06:30 · Score: 5, Insightful

And how are they supposed to do that? Individual workers calling their Senators up on the phone, each one of them telling the Senator something slightly different from the last one? Senators don't take phone calls from workers. They take phone calls from executives.
Actually, they don't take phone calls from either. They take phone calls from lobbyists, people with whom they have a relationship and who have worked with them before. Corporate management has plenty of money to hire them. Individual workers don't.
They can, however, get together and pool their money to hire a lobbyist. We should make up a name for such a unified group of people.
Doesn't work. by rsilvergun · 2012-07-22 06:43 · Score: 5, Insightful

Really. It doesn't. Globalism Breaks Capitalism. Period. It's that simple. You are completing on the global stage. Your employer is not. You can't win. You can't keep up. They will import desperate workers from impoverished countries. You will compete with them for food and shelter. Automation makes you disposable and obsolete. You can't work elsewhere, because there are very few jobs (automation) and there are lots of people to do those jobs (globalism).

Free market Capitalism is fundamentally broken. Adam Smith wasn't a futurist. He had no vision. Ayn Rand was just a little woman afraid of a nasty dictator. Get over your fear, and learn to face facts. Adam couldn't, Ayn couldn't. Can you?

--
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
1. Re:Doesn't work. by sjames · 2012-07-22 07:24 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  It's worth noting that Smith strongly advocated market regulation. He warned that inadequate or incompetent regulation of the market would lead to exactly the sorts of problems we're having now. He further warned against anything like corporate personhood as that would remove moral thinking from economic decisions.
  The so-called proponents of Smith's Capitalism are VERY selective about which parts they implement and 100% of his warnings have fallen on deaf ears. They are just as bad as the fundamentalist Jihadists who like to skip over all the bits about not killing 'people of the book'.
Re:one good result: by circletimessquare · 2012-07-22 06:49 · Score: 5, Insightful

it's ok to think the government would do a poor job at providing for our health
but it's insane to think corporations would do a better job
therefore, you choose government
for example, those europeans with universal healthcare live longer than americans, and pay less for their healthcare
because the american model is not about our health, it is about maximizing profit

--
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Re:This is why we need more unions and more worker by artor3 · 2012-07-22 06:57 · Score: 5, Insightful

This is why we need more unions and more workers rights.
and they should be able to use contractors and subcontractors to get out being liable.
Actually, in the US, this kind of ridiculously dangerous behavior would be covered by OSHA laws.
OSHA laws which only exist thanks to unions.
Moral Credibility by cryfreedomlove · 2012-07-22 07:09 · Score: 5, Interesting

In order to safely operate today's generation of nuclear fission reactors, you need the operators and regulators to be transparent and competent. The folks running this Fukushima travesty are neither transparent nor competent.

Therefore I am forced to conclude that the human race in 2012 does not have the moral credibility to be trusted to operate nuclear fission reactors.
Re:This is why we need more unions and more worker by Teancum · 2012-07-22 08:44 · Score: 5, Interesting

I'm not saying it's a perfect system, far from it. But it's not even close to the "legalized bribe" that most people who don't work in Washington imagine it is.
Having been a candidate for public office before, I will say it is hard to turn down campaign donations from groups that offer enough money to finance your campaign. And I've had offers from groups that I most certainly didn't agree with for money I could have desperately used in order to finance my campaign.
While the laws have changed somewhat since this practice was happening, there was in the past an option for federal office holders (Senate & U.S. House) to be able to pocket excess campaign donations after they were defeated in an election or went into retirement. This still is the case for some state and municipal office seekers (and certainly was in my case when running for municipal office). I had to report all of the donations of course and file formal reports on all of the income and expenses (which typically break even if you are being serious about a campaign), but if a "generous donation" was to fall in your lap, it certainly could end up being something very much like a legalized bribe.
I do agree though with the fact that lobbyists do much more than handing out huge piles of money. They do tend to be experts on the topics they advocate about and can be very useful in terms of being able to understand what a particular constituency group or industry group thinks about a particular piece of legislation. As long as you understand the bias that the bring to the table, they can also be useful for obtaining information about that particular topic they are advocating for as well.