|
|
|
|
|
by legitster
44 days ago
|
|
> and thousands indirectly (i.e. cancer) though the count for that is disputed That's the thing, these numbers have been extremely inflated. The LNT model we've used for nuclear safety has never withstood any serious scrutiny. If anything, we've learned humans are extremely resilient to non-acute exposure. Excess death numbers at places like Fukushima and Chernobyl have found almost no noticeable change in cancer rates, even for people with serious exposure. Ironically, if you compare excess death numbers to traditional fuel sources (coal, gas, etc) they are much worse. |
|