Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by OpieCunningham 5583 days ago
Is there a reason why you didn't quote the other part of the article?

Yes. The claim was definitive that nothing bad happened. I was referencing information that states the opposite of that claim. If the claim had been definitive that everything bad happened I would have referenced information that states the opposite of that. The fact is, the health of the populace post-TMI is heavily debated. If I were attempting to hide the subset of information that supported the claim I would not have included the links.
1 comments
Natsu 5582 days ago
> Yes. The claim was definitive that nothing bad happened.

And that claim was correct. That study, even if one accepts it as absolute fact, does not support the hypothesis that the TMI accident was a contributing cause of death.

Even so, it would be interesting to compare how the increase in the death rate compared to "safe" things, such as traffic accidents, smoking, and other intentional risks that people take.

But that's the key word, isn't it? "Intentional" risks.

link
OpieCunningham 5582 days ago
And that claim was correct.

No, it wasn't. As referenced, there are studies which demonstrate the exact opposite. Sorry, but it's simply a fact that those studies exist. Head in the sand doesn't make them go away.

link