|
`Nemesis posted:Due to risk of static electricity, do not enter vehicle during fueling operations i'd take a broken ankle over having to walk that far while on fire
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 05:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:25 |
|
|
Hollow Talk posted:Don't worry, we can all guess how hard it must be to keep those three hands with 7-8 fingers each coordinated. Long term radiation exposure is actually an area that we don't know very much about. We have data for people who are exposed to huge amounts of radiation (the biggest data set being the survivors from Hiroshima and Nagasaki) and we know what sort of effects will come from acute exposures like that. Long term exposure to very high levels of radiation doesn't happen because you die. The real trouble is what's called "chronic low dose exposure." That stuff is really touchy, there are a lot of different ideas about what this does to people and everyone that has an opinion defends it pretty strongly. There just isn't a good set of data for us to pull from on this one, but the general consensus is that any effects due to long term exposure to small amounts of radiation are either not harmful, or not so harmful that you can identify any trends and it just falls into the background noise from the dangers of regular life. A few people also suggest the existence of a hormesis effect, and correspondingly a hormesis dose, but I'm not so sure about that. Nuclear workers in general do have lower cancer rates than the general public but that's directly linked to the very low smoking rate among nuclear workers. So no matter what, smoking is way bad for you. Personally I think the Linear No Threshold folks (LNT), the ones that push the "there is no safe dose" are full of it. There is zero science to back up their claims (although also zero science to refute their claims, in fairness) and I think that if LNT was true you would see the evidence in populations that live in high radiation areas (high elevations, on the Colorado plateau, that one town in Turkey) or workers with lots of exposure like flight crews. Since we don't see that sort of effect I suspect it just isn't there. Anecdotally one of my professors maintains that the first guy to mention the "no safe dose" did so in a speech, but his private correspondence shows that he was aware that this wasn't true. He just wanted people to have a healthy respect for it so he said there wasn't a safe dose and now a bunch of anti-nuke folks shout it like it's gospel and scare the world.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 11:08
|
|
|
`Nemesis posted:Due to risk of static electricity, do not enter vehicle during fueling operations Oh phew those two guys got out of it barely scathed... *Third guy walks out* 
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 11:42
|
|
|
FuturePastNow posted:Must be treasure in there No! This is not a place of honor!
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 11:47
|
|
|
Olothreutes posted:Long term radiation exposure is actually an area that we don't know very much about. We have data for people who are exposed to huge amounts of radiation (the biggest data set being the survivors from Hiroshima and Nagasaki) and we know what sort of effects will come from acute exposures like that. Long term exposure to very high levels of radiation doesn't happen because you die. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramsar,_Mazandaran
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 11:54
|
|
|
Y'know the photo posted ages ago of some welding equipment that was literally grounded in a bucket of earth? I always thought that was a joke. I took this photo today in Mumbai:  
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 14:15
|
|
|
VectorSigma posted:i'd take a broken ankle over having to walk that far while on fire And miss the perfect opportunity to swan dive while on fire into a snow bank? Really?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
   Back in the early 70's, the John Birch Society was fighting the communist threat of OSHA because, it was bad for businesses to be threatened by government bureaucrat commies. The free market and businessmen loved their workers and would never cut corners to harm them. It was unthinkable so they created all sorts of loving propaganda to undermine OSHA including a little booklet called OSHAcrats I have in my propaganda collection. The thirteen page essay starts the education with a comparison of communism and government bureaucracy because how else can you make a logical argument against OSHA?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
Just learned that David Hahn died this September at the age of 39. No cause of death has been released as it's apparently still under investigation, but I think I can probably guess...
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
Sirotan posted:Just learned that David Hahn died this September at the age of 39. No cause of death has been released as it's apparently still under investigation, but I think I can probably guess... Meth. Seriously, if those facial lesions were radiation-related he'd have been dead long before this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
Olothreutes posted:There just isn't a good set of data for us to pull from on this one What about people that have spent months on ISS or Mir? Are there not enough of them to generalize from?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 17:28
|
|
|
haveblue posted:What about people that have spent months on ISS or Mir? Are there not enough of them to generalize from? Exactly. Finding a large enough group to be able to extrapolate reliably from isn't easy. Most people don't get much in the way of exposure. Also the people on space stations aren't there for very long, comparatively. The studies they want to do would involve people with years of exposure probably. There are also issues because of medical care, which I think is silly but I'm not a dosimetrist really. I guess there's some concern that having access to good medical care will obviate the effects of chronic exposure. I do some dosimetry but it's mostly acute and "yes, you should evacuate the building before this experiment" sort of stuff. The best group would probably be nuclear reactor workers, there are a lot of them and they keep track of their dose. But there are so many different effects on health outcomes that it's pretty hard to determine one thing as the root cause of an issue.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
Olothreutes posted:Exactly. Finding a large enough group to be able to extrapolate reliably from isn't easy. Most people don't get much in the way of exposure. Also the people on space stations aren't there for very long, comparatively. The studies they want to do would involve people with years of exposure probably. Also prolonged microgravity would seem like one hell of a confounding variable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Meth. This page from a deleted science blog has some theories on the facial lesions, as well as comments from people who claimed to know him: https://web.archive.org/web/20140808060135/http://depletedcranium.com/the-radioactive-boyscout-strikes-again/ This article also has some interesting information: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-100-years.html He was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia and bi-polar disorder, and had a history of substance abuse. His mom also had issues and committed suicide. Nonetheless, David Hahn's cause of death still hasn't been released.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 18:59
|
|
|
There are the people who "illegally" moved back into the Chernobyl exclusion zone, but, as with other cases, you'd likely have confounding effects due to them living in the most forsaken part of a generally forsaken region. I imagine vodka and cigarette consumption are also quite high. Academics are another group likely to have higher than normal total lifetime radiation counts due to the need to fly constantly to get to professional conferences. There, however, the opposing effect of them usually having 10+ year life expectancy advantages over most people due to excellent healthcare/diet choices/overall quality of life would no doubt come into play in determining long term health outcomes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 19:00
|
|
|
Flight crews would be a relatively large group.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 19:57
|
|
|
Basically there are so many mitigating factors in daily life (not to mention biology) that it's nigh on impossible to definitively prove causation between chronic, low level exposure and any deleterious health effects (especially cancer) in court. Cancer 20 years after working around sources that bump you above background? Good luck proving that was the cause (especially if dosimetry was used properly). For the average person it's hardly something to fret over much. You are basically receiving small amounts of radiation at all times regardless.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
I just want the last people to finish dying to Mesothelioma so we can get so new commercials in between episodes of Judge Judy
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
Neutrino posted:
That's a cool looking horse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
Neutrino posted:
Sorry but there's no way OSHA'd let you ride a horse that's not a mare 
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
the john birch society hq is like 2 miles from me. i bet it's full of safety hazards
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 23:30
|
|
|
Free Market Mambo posted:Flight crews would be a relatively large group. They are, but they don't track their occupational dose even though they receive more radiation than nuclear workers. I guess you could make them all wear dosimeters if you wanted the data badly enough.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
isn't it da sound of da police?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
Pinch Me Im Meming posted:isn't it da sound of da police? The space police in particular! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwY28rpyKDE
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
Thats the sound of juggalos
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
Olothreutes posted:Exactly. Finding a large enough group to be able to extrapolate reliably from isn't easy. Most people don't get much in the way of exposure. Also the people on space stations aren't there for very long, comparatively. The studies they want to do would involve people with years of exposure probably. So the nuclear workers supplying such a wealth of epidemiological data on <5mSv yearly doses are Free Market Mambo posted:Flight crews would be a relatively large group. When people talk about the great unknown where LNT can't be not proven, there's a window between something like 5 mSv and 30 mSv where equivalencies drawn from animal testing or arguments that 50mSv acute doses are equivalent to similar chronic doses when such a worker is benched for the remainder of a year indicate its possible LNT might be disproved if there was an ethical way to expose people to 5-30 mSv per year.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 01:02
|
|
|
Buttcoin purse posted:Thanks, I think I've read and freaked out about all the nuclear accidents but I hadn't read this page before. I expect that I'll have a nightmare where I see the sign but I can't run 
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
I think this is my favorite hazard symbol It's just "health hazard", apparently, but I like to think of it as "intrinsic field subtractor in use"
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 01:17
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:I think this is my favorite hazard symbol Pop Rocks overdose.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 01:23
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:I think this is my favorite hazard symbol Warning: Jack Kirby In Vicinity
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 01:25
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:I think this is my favorite hazard symbol
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 01:31
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:That is very cool. What is the circle in the forest, exactly? Where was the reactor, and where are these contaminated rail yard areas and hot cells you're talking about?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 02:37
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:I think this is my favorite hazard symbol That's a good symbol. I have no idea what the gently caress it means, but if I saw that symbol on a door or a barrel or something I would stay away.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
Pinch Me Im Meming posted:isn't it da sound of da police? Thank you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 03:46
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:I think this is my favorite hazard symbol Ive seen these on barrels at work. I think it means that the contents may cause cancer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 04:10
|
|
|
I wonder if airlines, etc. might be reluctant to issue dosimeters even on a volunteer basis lest they feel open to litigation or hazard pay or some such for the pilots and crew. No doubt those folks are aware they're getting additional exposure, but codify it and make it official (with a badge!) and suddenly folks get worried.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 04:56
|
|
|
REMEMBER SPONGE MONKEYS posted:I wonder if airlines, etc. might be reluctant to issue dosimeters even on a volunteer basis lest they feel open to litigation or hazard pay or some such for the pilots and crew. No doubt those folks are aware they're getting additional exposure, but codify it and make it official (with a badge!) and suddenly folks get worried. Also at that point you're asking people to volunteer for a research program. Are you going to compensate them? If you're not then there's the whole angle of "major corporations asking employees to participate in scientific studies for free."
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 05:02
|
|
|
hide dosimeter film in nametags. issue new nametag designs periodically and require turn-in of old tags.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 05:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:25 |
|
|
I don't think is it necessary for the individuals to carry a meter although that would have it's own set of problems. You need a box somewhere that knows it's altitude so it can match it's radiation measurements with that flight. It will require you to design something that will pass the FAA since it would be considered installed equipment that is not on an experimental aircraft and it will take years to get approval(See how long it takes to get entertainment equipment on planes). Then you have to convince companies to carry the thing using their maintenance time to do it in a spot that would be useful to you. There is the associated fuel costs the companies would like to charge you for. You also have to get the data back some how. Not forgetting the legal and liability issues that would come from the data should it be found that pilots do have an increase risk from their job. The easy way would be to ask pilots for their health data and match it against their flight logs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 05:25
|
|