Weasel wrote:
That is Exactly what Obama did. Kept imported products comming in to avoid an International Commerce Crisis. Regardless of the poisoning of the people that Loved him so much.
No one will admit that Obama in one Sick, and Greedy Waste of Human Flesh!
"Fundamentally Changing the Culture of America"
Good job asshole.
That is Exactly what Obama did. Kept imported prod... (
show quote)
weasel,,
this is the kind of thing that makes a person distrust information from the Govt.. Radiation for most of us, means something unknown and fearsome..
Seem by some articles, we know nothing..
but...couple samples....
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-16/epa-says-higher-radiation-levels-pose-no-harmful-health-effectThe Obama administration finalized a document in its waning days increasing the amount of radiation exposure in drinking water during an nuclear emergency to 500 mrem before emergency officials were required to provide bottled water or other alternative drinking water sources.
n the event of a dirty bomb or a nuclear meltdown, emergency responders can safely tolerate radiation levels equivalent to thousands of chest X-rays, the Environmental Protection Agency said in new guidelines that ease off on established safety levels.
The EPA’s determination sets a level ten times the drinking water standard for radiation recommended under President Barack Obama. It could lead to the administration of President Donald Trump weakening radiation safety levels, watchdog groups critical of the move say.
"It’s really a huge amount of radiation they are saying is safe," said Daniel Hirsch, the retired director of the University of California, Santa Cruz’s program on environmental and nuclear policy. "The position taken could readily unravel all radiation protection rules."
The change was included as part of EPA "guidance" on messaging and communications in the event of a nuclear power plant meltdown or dirty bomb attack. The FAQ document, dated September 2017, is part of a broader planning document for nuclear emergencies, and does not carry the weight of federal standards or law.
"According to radiation safety experts, radiation exposures of 5-10 rem (5,000-10,000 mrem or 50-100 mSv) usually result in no harmful health effects, because radiation below these levels is a minor contributor to our overall cancer risk," EPA said in the document. That level is equivalent to as many as 5,000 chest X-rays or seven to 14 chest CT scans, according to a comparison with Food and Drug Administration data.
A 2007 version of the same document stated that no level of radiation is safe, concluding: "The current body of scientific knowledge tells us this."
Read More: Trump Plays Down Health Hazard in Making Climate Rule Repeal
“EPA has not changed its standards regarding radiation exposure, and no protective guidelines were changed during this administration," EPA spokeswoman Liz Bowman said in a statement. "We are simply providing more supporting resources.”
For a little balance, this article may be worth a look..
http://reason.com/archives/2014/07/06/raising-the-epa-radiation-limit-will-savRaising the EPA Radiation Limit Will Save Thousands of Lives and Billions of Dollars
he trigger for the change was the government recognizing the ramifications of two things. The first is the reality of nuclear terrorism. The Government Accounting Office (GAO) has recently insisted that the EPA establish realistic limits in accordance with the latest science. Under the old limits, a tiny “dirty bomb” explosion in an American city would have meant evacuating hundreds of thousands of people.
The second is Fukushima. After the catastrophic meltdown at the Japanese nuclear power plant in 2011, some 130,000 people were forcibly removed from their homes in accordance with strict radiation standards. This resulted in the unnecessary and unfortunate deaths of some 1600 elderly and ill persons. Yet no residents died—or even became ill—from the radiation. Even so, Japan closed down 48 nuclear plants and Germany announced it would close all of its plants. The cost to their citizenry in higher electricity prices—and higher carbon emissions—is staggering.
The cost to U.S. citizens is staggering as well. Ultra-low limits have delayed