Radiation and Reason The Impact of Science on a Culture of Fear Prof Wade Allison
Download As PDF : Radiation and Reason The Impact of Science on a Culture of Fear Prof Wade Allison 
The human race is in a dilemma; it is threatened by economic instability on one hand and climate change on the other. Either of these could lead to widespread unrest and political turmoil, if the right choices are not made now. In particular, prosperity without carbon emission implies a comprehensive switch in our sources of energy. With luck, the activity generated by the process of switching will also contribute to prosperity in the short and medium term. There are many solutions – wind, tidal, solar, improved efficiency – but the most powerful and reliable source is nuclear. However, it is widely supposed that this presents a major problem of safety. Is this long-held concern about radiation and nuclear technology fully justified? Straightforward questions should have simple answers, and the simplest answer is No. Explaining and exploring the question and this answer in accessible terms is the subject of this book.
Radiation and Reason The Impact of Science on a Culture of Fear Prof Wade Allison
Professor Wade has written the seminal work on radiation and safety. Prof. Wade taught and researched particle physics at Oxford for 40 years. He was not an English major or a sociology professor. In 2005 he developed a course and textbook on the use of radiation in medicine for imaging and cancer radiotherapy.The book describes how the current fear of radiation developed. The safety standards set up in 1950 were based upon very little scientific knowledge or experience. They were designed to be very conservative and based upon the Linear No Threshold (LNT) theory. By 1990 these standards were tightened by a factor of 150. Prof Wade recommends that the safety standards be reduced by a factor of 6 from 1950 or 1000 from 1990.
Prof Wade relies upon empirical evidence to support his conclusion: medical history of survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, medical history of workers exposed to radiation, radiobiology, cancer radiotherapy, medical experiments on laboratory animals, and background radiation levels.
The nuclear bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki exposed hundreds of thousands of people to very high levels of single dose full body radiation. 280,000 survivors were tracked from 1950 to 1990 relative to a control group of 25,000 not exposed to radiation. 7.9% of the survivors died of cancer, 7.5% of natural causes and .4% from radiation induced cancer. Statistically significant radiation effects are seen for cancers but not for other causes of death or effects upon pregnancy. The level of cancer risk below 100 milli sieverts is so low that it can not be detected in a 50 year study involving 100,000 people. This contradicts the no threshold assumption of the LNT theory.
The average additional cancer rate per 1000 people over 50 years was 5 which corresponds to a 10 week reduction in life expectancy. But this number varied from 8 per thousand at 100-200 millisieverts to 90 per thousand above 2000 millisieverts.
The UK Ministry of Defense did a study of 170,000 workers exposed to an average of 25 millisievert of radiation above background radiation levels over their careers. These workers were tracked to age 85 or 2002 whichever came first. These workers suffered about 20% less cancers than the general population. This result is consistent with a threshold level at which radiation poses no danger and is suggestive of a positive effect resulting from low radiation doses.
Denver, at a high altitude, has radiation levels that are three times the safety standard set by the International Commission for Radiological Protection but a lower cancer rate than the US on average. This result is consistent with a threshold level at which radiation poses no danger and is suggestive of a positive effect resulting from low radiation doses.
Anti nuclear Greens will say that setting the radiation safety standards 1000 times lower than required is just erring on the side of safety. The problem is the effect that this standard has upon the lives of people living near a nuclear accident. No one died from radiation in Fukushima, 1600 people have died from the effects of the evacuation of Fukushima (suicides and people hospitalized at the time of the evacuation). Hundreds of thousands of people's lives have been turned completely upside down because the government will not allow them to return to their homes, their community, their businesses, and their jobs.
Green activists who whipped up the irrational fear of radiation during the Fukushima crisis have blood on their hands.
Product details
|
Tags : Radiation and Reason: The Impact of Science on a Culture of Fear - Kindle edition by Prof. Wade Allison. Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Use features like bookmarks, note taking and highlighting while reading Radiation and Reason: The Impact of Science on a Culture of Fear.,ebook,Prof. Wade Allison,Radiation and Reason: The Impact of Science on a Culture of Fear,SCIENCE Physics,SCIENCE Radiation
People also read other books :
- The human machine Arnold Bennett 9781171828303 Books
- A'loc Chronicles of M Book 3 edition by Nicholas Forristal Stephanie Dagg Carl DiMaria Literature Fiction eBooks
- The Boot and the Bone edition by Gerald M Hoem Literature Fiction eBooks
- The Snow and The Darkness edition by Matthew Warren Wilson Mystery Thriller Suspense eBooks
- Departed A Private Investigator Series of Crime and Suspense Thrillers Book 3 edition by Nick Stephenson Mystery Thriller Suspense eBooks
Radiation and Reason The Impact of Science on a Culture of Fear Prof Wade Allison Reviews
A clear and concise call to everyone to re-evaluate their position on the real dangers of radiation and consequently their feelings about nuclear power. A must- read.
Dr. Wade Allison has written an impressive book explaining what radiation is, how it works, and what it can and cannot do. All life developed in a sea of natural radiation and we are still continuously exposed to it today. Some studies indicate that life cannot survive without it. Other studies indicate that low-dose radiation stimulates the DNA repair system. Fear-mongering about radiation doses tinier than the ones you receive flying in a jet or visiting the American Southwest have led people to panic about nuclear power while ignoring the enormous annual death toll from fossil fuel emissions. An important book on an important topic.
France has been producing electricity with nuclear power for less than 80 grams of CO2 per kilowatt hour for over
20 years. Meanwhile German electricity generates 6 times as much CO2 per kilowatt hour and Australia's generates
over 10 times more. Just imagine if the anti-nuclear movement hadn't stopped the nuclear
roll out in the 80s and 90s in the US and elsewhere. We'd all have much cleaner electricity and climate change would
be far less critical. Ignorance about radiation drove the fear mongering and we have lost, as a consequence
20 years on the battle against climate change.
The suffering at Fukushima could also have been avoided. The public could have and should have been back rebuilding
their lives. But instead they are homeless and traumatised, a savage testimony to the power of ignorance to terrify.
This book is very useful for the lay person. Whilst some of the matter is technical it still can be grasped. It provides the information with which a person can make informed judgements about nuclear power and to put its associated risks in perspective. It is of use to people who would like to be informed about the world around them.I believe this book will not be useful to those who have already made up their minds as to the unacceptability of nuclear power. If you are one of these people then do not read this book. It will challenge your beliefs.
A bit basic for many who did well in high school science, there are still many excellent insights peppered throughout which are not often articulated partly because they are taken for granted by those who already know. Radiation is certainly something to be wary of in much the same way as being out in the sun for more than an hour. Wait - that's the same thing....
The book is clearly written getting to the heart nuclear reactors. It gets high marks for that. The one disappointment was thorium. There was a short summary of its magic properties, no follow up. Th deserves the detailed description of the other technologies. I kept waiting for one as I read on. Otherwise an excellent book..
Professor Wade has written the seminal work on radiation and safety. Prof. Wade taught and researched particle physics at Oxford for 40 years. He was not an English major or a sociology professor. In 2005 he developed a course and textbook on the use of radiation in medicine for imaging and cancer radiotherapy.
The book describes how the current fear of radiation developed. The safety standards set up in 1950 were based upon very little scientific knowledge or experience. They were designed to be very conservative and based upon the Linear No Threshold (LNT) theory. By 1990 these standards were tightened by a factor of 150. Prof Wade recommends that the safety standards be reduced by a factor of 6 from 1950 or 1000 from 1990.
Prof Wade relies upon empirical evidence to support his conclusion medical history of survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, medical history of workers exposed to radiation, radiobiology, cancer radiotherapy, medical experiments on laboratory animals, and background radiation levels.
The nuclear bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki exposed hundreds of thousands of people to very high levels of single dose full body radiation. 280,000 survivors were tracked from 1950 to 1990 relative to a control group of 25,000 not exposed to radiation. 7.9% of the survivors died of cancer, 7.5% of natural causes and .4% from radiation induced cancer. Statistically significant radiation effects are seen for cancers but not for other causes of death or effects upon pregnancy. The level of cancer risk below 100 milli sieverts is so low that it can not be detected in a 50 year study involving 100,000 people. This contradicts the no threshold assumption of the LNT theory.
The average additional cancer rate per 1000 people over 50 years was 5 which corresponds to a 10 week reduction in life expectancy. But this number varied from 8 per thousand at 100-200 millisieverts to 90 per thousand above 2000 millisieverts.
The UK Ministry of Defense did a study of 170,000 workers exposed to an average of 25 millisievert of radiation above background radiation levels over their careers. These workers were tracked to age 85 or 2002 whichever came first. These workers suffered about 20% less cancers than the general population. This result is consistent with a threshold level at which radiation poses no danger and is suggestive of a positive effect resulting from low radiation doses.
Denver, at a high altitude, has radiation levels that are three times the safety standard set by the International Commission for Radiological Protection but a lower cancer rate than the US on average. This result is consistent with a threshold level at which radiation poses no danger and is suggestive of a positive effect resulting from low radiation doses.
Anti nuclear Greens will say that setting the radiation safety standards 1000 times lower than required is just erring on the side of safety. The problem is the effect that this standard has upon the lives of people living near a nuclear accident. No one died from radiation in Fukushima, 1600 people have died from the effects of the evacuation of Fukushima (suicides and people hospitalized at the time of the evacuation). Hundreds of thousands of people's lives have been turned completely upside down because the government will not allow them to return to their homes, their community, their businesses, and their jobs.
Green activists who whipped up the irrational fear of radiation during the Fukushima crisis have blood on their hands.
0 Response to "⇒ Descargar Free Radiation and Reason The Impact of Science on a Culture of Fear Prof Wade Allison"
Post a Comment