• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged nuclear power safe?

r-j said:
From a practical point of view, what do you think people will choose when shopping? Produce and milk with "a really really small amount of cesium in it", or produce and milk with none at all?

Think about it, from an economic point of view.
Click to expand...

They better stop drinking milk today already then. There is almost certainly no milk with "no cesium at all" in it.
 
r-j said:
You just made that up.
Click to expand...

Nope, he's right. Just as I said in my previous post, it is probably impossible to get any kind of food that has absolutely no radioactive material in it. No matter what, there are going to be at least a few radioactive atoms in whatever you are eating, whether it is "organic" or not. It's just basic physics & chemistry (plus an understanding of the numbers) to know why this is true.

ETA: For example, think of it this way... according to basic chemistry, there are about 6.022x1023 atoms in one mole of material (this is Avogadro's number). There are roughly 92 naturally-occurring chemical elements on the periodic table, and with those a significant percentage (call it 10-20%, just to guess) have naturally-occurring radioactive isotopes. Now, crunch the numbers, and with all the mixing up of atoms in the world, etc etc do you see how it is highly likely that in anything you consume there is at least a few atoms (out of the ~1023 or 1024 that you consume in a standard meal) of naturally-occurring radioactive material?
 
Last edited:
r-j said:
You just made that up.
Click to expand...

Hum. No. You should check up before making such a statement. Try to look up "natural radioactivity in food".

But you see, there is such a things as "so-small-we-can-ignore-it" and it has been already counted in the average background radioactivity a person get per year (2.5 mSv per year in avg). . But it is different than "none".
 
Last edited:
Aepervius said:
Hum. No. You should check up before making such a statement. Try to look up "natural radioactivity in food".

But you see, there is such a things as "so-small-we-can-ignore-it" and it has been already counted in the average background radioactivity a person get per year (2.5 mSv per year in avg). . But it is different than "none".
Click to expand...

Correct. In fact, if you check this page from the United States' EPA, you'll see that the average person receives a radioactive dose of approximately 40 mrem/year simply from eating food & consuming water (no matter what the source).

Bottom line: if you want to ensure that you receive no radiation at all from food, stop eating.
 
I checked long ago, there is no natural source of radioactive Cesium, and there certainly isn't any in the food we eat.

You made that up. But by all means, show us a source that says there is Cesium 137 in all our food. I think a lot of people would be interested to see that.
 
Aepervius said:
They better stop drinking milk today already then. There is almost certainly no milk with "no cesium at all" in it.
Click to expand...

If you can find a source of valid research that shows that is true, it would be of great interest right now.

Or you could admit you made that up.
 
r-j said:
I checked long ago, there is no natural source of radioactive Cesium, and there certainly isn't any in the food we eat.

You made that up. But by all means, show us a source that says there is Cesium 137 in all our food. I think a lot of people would be interested to see that.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure about Cesium 137 (I misunderstood the point, I think), but are you willing to admit that there are naturally-occurring radioactive elements in everything that we eat and you therefore cannot get away from consuming radiation at a rate of about 40 mrem/year from this source?
 
Last edited:
r-j said:
I checked long ago, there is no natural source of radioactive Cesium, and there certainly isn't any in the food we eat.

You made that up. But by all means, show us a source that says there is Cesium 137 in all our food. I think a lot of people would be interested to see that.
Click to expand...

Yeah non natural.

Oh wait, except the coal we are burning belching uranium in the air.

Oh wait except the A bomb we exploded in the air.

Oh wait some cesium has a half life of 2 years (some 30 year).

Heck even if you are speaking of Cesium 137 I betcha I can find some pretty natural source. wanna do the bet ? Hint : if U235 exists naturall , then a natural source of Cs137 exists.
 
I can't believe the level of unscientific untrue information some people will say. I also doubt you will ever admit the truth. You simply made that up.

Anyone who studies food safety would know it right away.
 
r-j said:
I can't believe the level of unscientific untrue information some people will say. I also doubt you will ever admit the truth. You simply made that up.

Anyone who studies food safety would know it right away.
Click to expand...

Anyone studying food would admit that it is true, but negligible in quantity.

Why instead of digging deeper you do not research ? I have given you enough info (30 year half life, source of Cesium , and where that primary source was belched in the air).

Geeeee. Is that so hard ?
 
Last edited:
I'm disgusted that anyone would make up something, on this kind of a forum, and then lie about it.
 
Especially something important, like Cesium137 in food.

If this is the attitude of the officials trying to tell everyone that things are safe, it's really disgusting.
 
r-j said:
I'm disgusted that anyone would make up something, on this kind of a forum, and then lie about it.
Click to expand...

Soooo. You did not check out I guess ? I am not surprised.

There are even many more isotope with various half life.

Heck , statistically I would not be surprised if there were other even less savory organo mettalic unsavory stuff in the milk in negligible quantity.
 
Last edited:
r-j said:
Especially something important, like Cesium137 in food.

If this is the attitude of the officials trying to tell everyone that things are safe, it's really disgusting.
Click to expand...

Again you are not understanding.

There is a difference between *none* and *negligible*. The quantity , unless a cow munching at a prairy 20m from the Prypat plant, is negligible.

In our food the amount of radio dangerous element is watched over and is usually in negligible quantity. Keyword : negligible.

And it depends on the isotope too and food. Bannana are well known for their amount of potassium. Champignons are relatively known to bio accumulate rapidely many isotope.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom