What to do in Case of a Nuclear Emergency (which could come, according to Obama, at any time)

[Liberation Angel]

http://www.ibiblio.org/rcip/nuclear.html

Since karmically the other two bad energy systems that Obama supports seem to be rebelling against his support for them (Offshore oil and Coal mining) we should be prepared in the event bad things come in threes.

Nuclear Reactors COULD go down at any time and could do major releases (beyind their already deadly daily releases of cancer-causing highly deadly man made radiation (which is uhnlike the radiaition from coal burning or natural background in that it is far deadlier in its effects)

Dirty Bombs are also a major concern.

But in any event be prepared.

Calcium, tincture of iodine and other things can help during regular exposure to nuke plant emissions as well as a major or even minor emergency/

Obama is supporting NEW nuke plants subsidies to the tune of 50+ BILLION Dollars for BIG ENERGY (like Halliburton, Bechtel, GE, Westinghouse and Exxon). This DESPITE his avowed determination to reduce nuclear risks and threats. On this issue he is wearing blinders for political reasons. He is in major and dangerous denial about the radiation exposure risks just as he has been in denial about the mistakes idiocy with offshore drilling and coal mining.

Sooner or later there will ber another accident or attack or just human error fuckup.

And we should be prepared.

Good info at the above site link


No Nukes, Mr. President!

It is not worth the safety and health of ANY more human beings, especially the children, to satiate the greed of International Corporate Fascism.

Remember the admonition against harming the little children

and act accordingly.

Experts agree that radioactive iodine and cesium, commonly used in cancer therapy and industrial radiography, are the most likely ingredients of a dirty bomb. How to minimize the damage? Start by wearing a mask--the thicker, the better. Then pop these chemical cures.

POTASSIUM IODIDE The thyroid is the only organ that collects iodine, so strike first. "Each thyroid cell is a parking lot with a specific number of spaces," explains Andrew Karam, Ph.D., a founding member of the Health Physics Society's Homeland Security Committee who, while in the navy's nuclear-power program, was contaminated 30 times. "If you put stable iodine in there first, you block the radioactive stuff." Potassium iodide is available online at KI4U.com. Take up to 130 milligrams (mg) as soon as you can after the blast." (Schipper, D., 2005)


Vitamins and homeopathic treatments:

Curry has been known to reduce the effects of radiation in chemotherapy patients. "The study showed that curcumin, the substance in turmeric that gives it and the dishes it flavors a characteristic yellow color, is a natural anti-inflammatory compound." WebMD
Swab the skin with a tincture of iodine...the effective dose in rats suggests human skin swabbing need only cover an area the size of a hand or scraped knee"

more at link

[unc70]

1. Walk towards the light.

Only half-way joking. That is the suggestion of a family member involved in civil preparedness. If the case of a significant event, for example at the local nuclear power installation, it would probably work about as well as anything else -- really poorly. Sort of like modern versions of duck-and-cover.

While not personally involved, others working in my group at that time were part of the cleanup at TMI and I had other connections with the industry back then. I am not a supporter of building new nukes - weapons or power generation - certainly not with anything close to current technology. Make cold fusion work, and I will reconsider.

[damonm]

2. "Make cold fusion work, and I will reconsider"...

or rub a lamp - that'll work just as well.

[Hekate]

3. In case of nuclear event: crouch under your desk, interlace your fingers & cover your head with...

... your hands, put your head between your knees and kiss your ass goodbye. :nuke:

Sorry kids, but after a 1950s childhood doing Duck and Cover I really no longer believe much of anything about surviving nukes in any form.

Hekate

[boppers]

4. What did we learn from Chernobyl?

56 deaths initially, up to 4,000 over the next 50 years...

Well, among other things, we learned to not freak out so much, we learned it was a good idea to built contamination systems.

We also learned that the worst nuclear power plant disaster isn't a whole lot more dangerous than a coal mine, or an oil rig, or a dam.

[Liberation Angel]

5. Almost a Million deaths and counting

There was a post a few days ago with a new study:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8201846

I think the new study fails to count many deaths from immune disorders caused by damaged thyroids plus new mutations of bacteria and viruses which become pandemics.(As predicted by Andrei Sakharov, father of the Soviet H Bomb & later dissident because of his warnings) in the 1950's)

Gimme a break. Nuke radiation kills more people than any other technology and will keep on killing in the environment for hundreds of thousands of years even if we shut them down today.

[William769]

6. Lets also not forget the 300,000 + that had to be resettled somewhere else.

[boppers]

7. Mutations affect "children of irradiated parents for as many as seven generations"...ha.

IOW, the so-called study is unscientific hogwash, only to be swallowed by those without a decent science education. It reads like the bad soviet science which brought us the reactor failure in the first place... full of wild-eyed theories, conveniently ignoring data which doesn't advance its premise.

Clue #1: Mutations can only be passed down via a mutated Zygote. The silly non-genetic "inheritance" model has been dis-proven. Abundantly.
Clue #2: Once a mutation is created, it's passed down *forever*, until another mutation changes/eliminates all descendants with the first mutation. "Seven generations" is beyond laughable, it's jaw-dropping ignorant.
Clue #3: Mutations (or, to use the odd terminology from the study, "chromosomal aberrations"), aren't a bad thing, or a good thing. They're a "change" thing. It's how evolution works.

[Liberation Angel]

8. ok then - mutations in our children are GOOD...

bleccccchhhh....

at least site some sources for your bs

which is what it is

------------

I worked in the industry

the only jaw dropping thing is if your jaw drops off from radiation induced cancer

Nukes Kill

so does ignorance and corporate propaganda

[boppers]

9. If you're going to argue with educated people:

"Cite" and "Site" are different words. They also mean different things.

Mis-use of those words indicates either a lack or education, or intentional ignorance.

[William769]

10. If your going to try to act like a educated person, then "Cite" your sources.

Not doing so does show intentional ignorance, among other things.

[Liberation Angel]

11. Yeah well - it was 3:30 am and a "site" would be nice with a link to a citation

that better?

I have a doctorate btw.

It was a careless mistake.

My point remains the same. Argue with facts. Citations and references.

[boppers]

13. Start here:

http://www.kiddofspeed.com/

...and then branch out.

[Liberation Angel]

16. I'M sure a motorcycle story is more credible than the NY Scientists

:puke:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

18. Don't you mean three Russian scientists?

As opposed to all of the hundreds of scientists working for the IAEA and the WHO who disagree with them?

[Liberation Angel]

19. Yeah, Three Scientists vs. a Motorcycle diarist (that's the link I responded to)

The Book makes it VERY clear that neither the IAEA (which is an advocacy organization for the Nuclear industry which is actually able to censor the WHO - if you read the article) nor WHO are reliable reporters since they are bound to promote nuclear, not critique or evaluate it objectively or even scientifically.

The IAEA has not responded, as far as I can tell, to this report yet so you can hardly say (without a source or link) that the IAEA or WHO Disagree with the scientific assessment.

Dr. Sherman has excellent credibility as well (she edited the book).

Of course proNukers attack her relentlessly because she speaks TRUTH TO POWER and has the credentials to call the nuclear monster for all its lies and mass cancer causing.No doubt this report is scathing towards the AEIE and WHO. But as yet they have not even responded.


Anyway, my comment was that someone post a link to a motorocycle diary as "proof" that Chernobyl was just fine and dandy with no grisly aftermath.

I happened to have discussed this with the Science Editor for Pravda (some twenty years ago) and he said the abominations and mutations of children in utero, women with dead fetuses inside them for 12-14 months and other major abnormalities was horrific. My local nuke advocate, a company spokeseman, said that such an accident could NOT be ruled out here in the US.

Say what you want.

I trust the report.

[boppers]

22. There's a reason I said "Start Here", not "end all rational thought that disagrees"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/05/AR2005090501144.html

'Chernobyl's Legacy: Health, Environmental and Socio-Economic Impacts." The study, involving more than 100 scientists, was compiled by U.N. agencies, including the International Atomic Energy Agency, and representatives of the governments of Ukraine, Russia and Belarus.'

So, your argument is that all 100 scientists are wrong, as are the governments of the people actually affected?

....But three people who assume that all cancer is caused by one incident are right?

[boppers]

14. You may have perfected some MASTER RACE.

I tend to think that change is good.

[Liberation Angel]

12. The Studies and Book are published by the New York Academy of Sciences

The Consequences of Chernobyl (From the Counterpunch article linked above)

By KARL GROSSMAN

Monday is the 24th anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear plant accident. It comes as the nuclear industry and pro-nuclear government officials in the U.S. and other nations try to “revive” nuclear power. It also follows the just-released publication of a book, the most comprehensive study ever made, on the impacts of the Chernobyl disaster.

Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment has just been published by the New York Academy of Sciences. It is authored by three noted scientists: Russian biologist Dr. Alexey Yablokov, former environmental advisor to the Russian president; Dr. Alexey Nesterenko, a biologist and ecologist in Belarus; and Dr.Vassili Nesterenko, a physicist and at the time of the accident director of the Institute of Nuclear Energy of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. Its editor is Dr. Janette Sherman, a physician and toxicologist long-involved in studying the health impacts of radioactivity.

The book is solidly based—on health data, radiological surveys and scientific reports—some 5,000 in all.It concludes that based on records now available, some 985,000 people died of cancer caused by the Chernobyl accident. That’s between when the accident occurred in 1986 and 2004.

More deaths, it projects, will follow.

The book explodes the claim of the International Atomic Energy Agency—still on its website – that the expected death toll from the Chernobyl accident will be 4,000. The IAEA, the new book shows, is under-estimating, to the extreme, the casualties of Chernobyl.

[ShortnFiery]

15. Duck and Cover!

:silly:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

17. Yes, homeopathy. Please use homeopathy.

Also, collodial silver.

[Liberation Angel]

20. It can't hurt. my brother the doctor always says

nt

[frazzled]

21. Know where your stash of vodka is

I recommend (and I'm not being snarky: this is incredibly excellent organic, locally grown vodka):




dry vermouth and olives optional ... I mean, it's a nuclear attack after all.