« links for 2006-11-28 | Main | links for 2006-11-30 »

November 30, 2006

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b49269e200d83500e1cd69e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Glowing in the dark?:

Comments

Juliano (I need economic luxury travel!) Ramos

I don't get how such a health risk can be swept under the rug by our officials. I was just having a conversation about this the other day - about how certain areas of the world are very proactive when it comes to people's safety and put in precautions without being told; others, need people to fall ill or even become terminal before things are taken seriously. It's very pathetic. I hope you don't end up being one of the statistics.

Patrizia Broghammer

I feel very concerned by the fact that RADIOACTIVE substances ACTUALLY entered Europe and London, so easily and nobody sees it...
This is a wonderful message for the terrorists.
What about dropping some of that in the water in London?
How many would be affected?

This is a huge thread and I do not understand why NOBODY pointed it out..

richard s

Thanks Chris - very reassuring (I think...)

David - just avoid the sushi.

David Brain

I fly to Moscow on Monday Richard. Any messages I can pass on?

Jackie Danicki

When I heard on the radio that passengers were being told to consult NHS Direct, I couldn't help but laugh. How unsurprising that you've just been subject to a cycle of buck-passing.

Chris Edwards

If you're worried about radiation, stop flying.

Unless you were unlucky enough to inhale a flake of Po-210, you probably got a higher dose of radiation from not-so-nearby quasars. Cosmic radiation levels at 10 000m are 150 times higher than at sea level. As a result, aircrew can end up with higher annual radiation doses than workers in nuclear-power stations. And don't rule out the lump of depleted uranium sitting in the plane's tail as a source of gamma rays.

Richard S

Thanks Heather - sage advice!

Heather Yaxley

When my father was very ill in France a few years ago, I learned to ignore medical risk statistics as they are meaningless. We didn't know whether he was one of the 20% who die or the 80% or don't - so the figure wasn't helpful. And whatever happened to him (fortunately he got well), affected future statistics.

I hope that you and everyone else who is at "low risk" proves not to have been affected in this case. And that medical "experts" begin to realise such statements are pointless and treat the public with the respect we deserve.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Broadcast

Publications

Paper.Li

stats