rudemedic Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Wrong... The potential for a radiation release similar to Chernobyl is still very real, even if the reasons might be some what different. The likelihood though is still low. The scale was introduced in 1990 by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Its a communication tool and not a scientific tool. You want to look at mSv levels for scientific tools. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Nuclear_Event_Scale#Level_6:_Serious_accident Who's died as a result of radiation? That seems to be one classification determinant, no one has died from radiation as yet (as far as I'm aware) therefore it isn't a class 4 yet- I think some one will but it hasn't happened yet. Do you think the Russians and the French blokes might be a bit biased? I love your little graph- but there are medical procedures which are more radioactive than a full body CT (an angiogram being one) and I read from a source (a bloke from the Japanese ministry) that the radiation level escaping is 14 mSv/hour. I've also seen the reports of the 400mSv but to be honest measuring it is not a good use of qualified people's time. Oh and the 100 mSv limit for radiation workers is on average 20mSv/year- you get 20 mSv in a year in this country you either get a long paid holiday or moved to a job with no radiation risk. BTW, what's your scientific background? Ironically the BMJ published last Friday has a big section on radiation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 (edited) Who's died as a result of radiation? That seems to be one classification determinant, no one has died from radiation as yet (as far as I'm aware) therefore it isn't a class 4 yet- I think some one will but it hasn't happened yet. Do you think the Russians and the French blokes might be a bit biased? Why do you presume you are in full possession of the facts ? The Japanese have put it at a 4 and the French have put it at a 6. I know a number of people have been confirmed as being exposed and I also know a number of people have died from the initial blasts (but could of easily been radiation as well). What caused those deaths exactly is unknown at this time. They aren't exactly releasing a l-ot of clear information. The fact the Japanese themselves have put the disaster at a 4 would be in a indication to someone has possible died from radiation, no ? I love your little graph- but there are medical procedures which are more radioactive than a full body CT (an angiogram being one) and I read from a source (a bloke from the Japanese ministry) that the radiation level escaping is 14 mSv/hour. I've also seen the reports of the 400mSv but to be honest measuring it is not a good use of qualified people's time. It's not my graph. You are suggesting that measuring the levels of radiation around the possibly affected area is not a good use of peoples time ? What planet are you on ? The safety of people in that area and the wider area is of the up most importance. The "peak" was 400 mSv/hour at one point but if the information coming out is correct that is no back down to much a much lower level. Considering increased levels of radiation is being detected all across Japan would indicate at some point there was a reasonably big escape. Oh and the 100 mSv limit for radiation workers is on average 20mSv/year- you get 20 mSv in a year in this country you either get a long paid holiday or moved to a job with no radiation risk. What's your point ? BTW, what's your scientific background? Ironically the BMJ published last Friday has a big section on radiation Not sure how to answer your question. I have a Bachelor of Science (Hons) in Information Technology. I don't go to to work in a white coat though but then again neither does my farther in law who is a chemical scientist.. But technically I am a scientist What is your scientific background? Is it even relevant ? I don't think a trainee doctor or a IT bod can claim to be experts in nuclear technology. Even if your little journal taught you what mSv is. I have had a strong personal interest in nuclear technology and the Chernobyl disaster for many a year. Hence my interest in this.... BY the way, anyone want to read a fantastic but sad book, I would recommend Voices from Chernobyl: The Oral History of a Nuclear Disaster. Its a great book and makes you pray like crazy all this doesn't get any worse and the workers are kept safe. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Voices-Chernobyl-History-Nuclear-Disaster/dp/0312425848 Edited March 16, 2011 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudemedic Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Why do you presume you are in full possession of the facts ? The Japanese have put it at a 4 and the French have put it at a 6. I know a number of people have been confirmed as being exposed and I also know a number of people have died from the initial blasts (but could of easily been radiation as well). What caused those deaths exactly is unknown at this time. They aren't exactly releasing a l-ot of clear information. The fact the Japanese themselves have put the disaster at a 4 would be in a indication to someone has possible died from radiation, no ? I don't claim to be in full possession of the facts but I'm more than capable of reading what others have reported. I've not heard of any deaths as a result of radiation, those that died at the plant did so as a result of fire until proven otherwise. Maybe the Japanese source is going off the assumtion that at least one of the people tasked with stopping things from getting worse will die some time in the future (due to the numbers and risk involved) perhaps that's the policy. It's not my graph. You are suggesting that measuring the levels of radiation around the possibly affected area is not a good use of peoples time ? What planet are you on ? The safety of people in that area and the wider area is of the up most importance. The "peak" was 400 mSv/hour at one point but if the information coming out is correct that is no back down to much a much lower level. Considering increased levels of radiation is being detected all across Japan would indicate at some point there was a reasonably big escape. To actually have people measuring levels of radiation with the corden is a total waste of time and puts people at unnecessary risk- radiation suits are good but they will not be infallible and have problems with keeping air-tightness. The only priority of those inside the corden should be to stop things from getting worse. I don't have a problem with someone measuring radiation levels at the corden in a radiation suit but that wasn't what you said, in fact that would be a good thing- as it means they can adapt the corden as necessary. If they have the capabilities to have measurement of the radiation levels without the need for someone in a radiaition suit then fine but I wouldn't presume they do (for example they may have gotten damaged). I don't know how things are progressing but I have some knowledge of how things have gone. I wouldn't assume that the reason increased levels of radiation is as a result of a big escape- for example how often is it measured, if you measure it more than you would normally there is a good chance that it will go up by accident. What's your point ? My point is that graphs like the one you found somewhere- I gave you credit for finding it (hence the yours)- are not wholly representative of the entire picture. Yes the limit for radition workers is an average of 20mSv per year over 5 years but in reality their are measures to control for it outside the standard ones. Not sure how to answer your question. I have a Bachelor of Science (Hons) in Information Technology. I don't go to to work in a white coat though but then again neither does my farther in law who is a chemical scientist.. But technically I am a scientist What is your scientific background? Is it even relevant ? I don't think a trainee doctor or a IT bod can claim to be experts in nuclear technology. Even if your little journal taught you what mSv is. I have had a strong personal interest in nuclear technology and the Chernobyl disaster for many a year. Hence my interest in this.... BY the way, anyone want to read a fantastic but sad book, I would recommend Voices from Chernobyl: The Oral History of a Nuclear Disaster. Its a great book and makes you pray like crazy all this doesn't get any worse and the workers are kept safe. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Voices-Chernobyl-History-Nuclear-Disaster/dp/0312425848 I didn't need a BMJ article to tell me what an sievert is, I have an A in A-level physics to do that. Not to mention the 90 minute lecture I've had in medical school a few years ago, plus the afternoon on managment of events like this. I don't claim to be an expert, I know a couple though- my brother is a nuclear engineer and my future sister-in-law is a medical physicist. I'm going to see them over the weekend so I'll ask them as part of general conversation. If there was ever a more urgent need for me to brush up on my nuclear risks then I know who to call. I've got a more pressing reason to brush up on my physics but you will find out about that in due course (a reader or two on here already know as they know me). Incidentally my scientific background is better than yours as I've already got the same level of degree and have now done enough credits to guarantee me a post-grad qualification on my way to a MSc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddog Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 (edited) Edit: just a thought - is this thread really the most appropriate place to have a 'science' willy-waving contest? Edited March 16, 2011 by maddog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudemedic Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Edit: just a thought - is this thread really the most appropriate place to have a 'science' willy-waving contest? No your quite right I'll stop- in fact I thought the same myself just prior to seeing your post. I was meerly curious as science correspondents tend to not have too much of a science background and whilst I knew roughly what zeros does I wasn't sure about his level of scientific knowledge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 (edited) I didn't need a BMJ article to tell me what an sievert is, I have an A in A-level physics to do that. Not to mention the 90 minute lecture I've had in medical school a few years ago, plus the afternoon on managment of events like this. I don't claim to be an expert, I know a couple though- my brother is a nuclear engineer and my future sister-in-law is a medical physicist. I'm going to see them over the weekend so I'll ask them as part of general conversation. If there was ever a more urgent need for me to brush up on my nuclear risks then I know who to call. I've got a more pressing reason to brush up on my physics but you will find out about that in due course (a reader or two on here already know as they know me). Incidentally my scientific background is better than yours as I've already got the same level of degree and have now done enough credits to guarantee me a post-grad qualification on my way to a MSc. So to sum up... You are as totally and utterly unqualified as me in the realm of Nuclear Science (despite the fact you said something which utterly incorrect)... Thanks for clearing that up... Your scientific knowledge is better than mine in the area of Medicine, that can not be denied. How you feel you have a better scientific knowledgeable than me in other scientific areas or in general is laughable. But that's the level you operate on You always seem to know someone about everything Get your brother on here and we can have a chat with the organ grinder instead of the monkey Edited March 16, 2011 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 (edited) To actually have people measuring levels of radiation with the corden is a total waste of time and puts people at unnecessary risk- radiation suits are good but they will not be infallible and have problems with keeping air-tightness. The only priority of those inside the corden should be to stop things from getting worse. I don't have a problem with someone measuring radiation levels at the corden in a radiation suit but that wasn't what you said, in fact that would be a good thing- as it means they can adapt the corden as necessary. If they have the capabilities to have measurement of the radiation levels without the need for someone in a radiaition suit then fine but I wouldn't presume they do (for example they may have gotten damaged). I don't know how things are progressing but I have some knowledge of how things have gone. I wouldn't assume that the reason increased levels of radiation is as a result of a big escape- for example how often is it measured, if you measure it more than you would normally there is a good chance that it will go up by accident. Oh look the wannabe doctor is now an expert in nuclear disaster management. Is your farther in law an expert in this area or some other family member You seem to think that measuring the radiation level is an either or choice... There is around about 150 people onsite at the moment. They wont all be walking around taking readings but you can grantee they will all be wearing personal detectors so they know if they are about get a lethal does. Edited March 16, 2011 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Incidentally my scientific background is better than yours as I've already got the same level of degree and have now done enough credits to guarantee me a post-grad qualification on my way to a MSc. hahahaha You :censored:ing tit. The pair of you looked childish but this takes it to a level unparalleled even on OWTB. I've got a massive cock if anyone cares? Look! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankly Mr Shankly Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 It's gone all The Day Today on here, hasn't it? Hilarious. You both could start arguments in paper bags couldn't you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Is it possible that I've been affected by radiation damage? I watched the coverage of the Tsunami on TV basically all day Friday. I felt fine for a while at the football on Saturday, but at about 2 or 3 on Sunday morning I began to feel like :censored:, and I've not felt that great ever since. There were lots of Japanese people out in Soho when I was there too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 rudemedic, may I politely suggest you abbreviate your username to 'rude' ? Then you wouldn't be such an obvious :censored:ing embarrassment to your (potential) profession. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudemedic Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 So to sum up... You are as totally and utterly unqualified as me in the realm of Nuclear Science (despite the fact you said something which utterly incorrect)... Thanks for clearing that up... Your scientific knowledge is better than mine in the area of Medicine, that can not be denied. How you feel you have a better scientific knowledgeable than me in other scientific areas or in general is laughable. But that's the level you operate on You always seem to know someone about everything Get your brother on here and we can have a chat with the organ grinder instead of the monkey 1.) What did I say which is incorrect- I'm not saying I didn't say anything I actually want to know so I don't make the same mistake anymore. 2.) I was only asking what your background is as for all I know you could be like some of the scientific correspondents for the likes of the Beeb and have an English degree. I now know better. 3.) Yes they will all be wearing radiation detectors but somehow they've come up with this 400mSv level (or 14mSv, depending on the source). I don't know how precisely radiation detectors that the likes of hospital lab staff/nuclear engineers wear work but they are colour coded, I've don't remember seeing one with a digital scale. 4.) What's the background radiation level in Warrington? How about Oldham? How about London? Do you know? Do you know where to look it up? It might get measured in cities in Japan (I'd expect so) but I have no idea how many and which ones (it could only get measured routinely in Tokyo outside those places near a nuclear power plant). If the levels went up today from yesterday is that just because of the nuclear plant problems or some other factor, if they go back down tomorrow was it just an anomoly. One measure means jack all a series of measures however all going in the same direction (i.e. up) is a bit more worrying. 5.)Incidentally they did measure a level of 400mSv at the nuclear plant, once and in one location and the levels returned to 11.9 mSv and then 0.6mSv. see http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/tsunamiupdate01.html If I were to measure your temperature and found it to be 40 degrees C, but measured it 2 minutes later and it was 36.9 and then again 15 minutes later and it was 36.9 and the same 1 hour later and 6 hours later, would you be worried if you felt fine? 6.) Incidentally you've seen Outbreak right? Those blokes in the yellow suits- my Dad was one of the blokes in the yellow suits (although his was blue) for Manchester, OK its not radiation but a good % of the principles for medical management are the same and in this country the personnel don't change too much. For example if there was a nuclear power station in Manchester my Dad would probably have been more heavily involved than the standard NHS consultants in the management of it releasing a lot of radiation. 7.) Finally I don't know everything the list of things people on here know more about than me is limitless for example I know little more than the basics about computers and computer programmes. The only one I know a bit more than that about is Minitab but that's not all that much use as most sensible people using a stats package use something else- often SPSS. In fact I'm not very practical at all. But this wasn't about what I know and what you know but somehow between us it has turned into that (I'm probably responsible for the bigger part of that) it was our opinions based on a similar level of knowledge about a tragedy and how serious it might get from some point yesterday/today. Incidentally Ackey I get your point but think you could have handled that better (although coming from me that's like a black kettle calling a grey pot black) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 (edited) Anyway... Moving on... 2035: US officials have concluded that the Japanese warnings have been insufficient, and that, deliberately or not, they have understated the potential threat of what is taking place inside the nuclear facility, according to the New York Times. Gregory Jaczko, the chairman of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, earlier said he believed that all the water in the spent fuel pool at reactor 4 had boiled dry, leaving fuel rods stored there exposed. "We believe that radiation levels are extremely high, which could possibly impact the ability to take corrective measures," he told a Congressional committee. 2027: Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency has said it is also concerned about the spent fuel storage pool inside the building housing reactor 3 at Fukushima Daiichi. The pools at both reactors 3 and 4 are reportedly boiling - there may not even be any water left in reactor 4's pool - and unless the spent fuel rods are cooled down, they could emit large quantities radiation. Radioactive steam was earlier said to be coming from reactor 3's pool. If cooling operations did not proceed well, the situation would "reach a critical stage in a couple of days", an agency official told the Kyodo news agency. But some good news... 2010: More on the power line being laid to the Fukushima Daiichi plant to help restore the reactor cooling systems: Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco) spokesman Naoki Tsunoda has said it is almost complete, and that engineers plan to test it "as soon as possible", according to the Associated Press. Reviving the electric-powered pumps might allow the engineers to finaly cool the overheated reactors and spent fuel storage ponds. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12307698 Sounds like there is a real race against time going on. Edited March 16, 2011 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 There is a theory that the Bristol Channel was overwhelmed by a tsunami in 1607. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Channel_floods,_1607 http://www.theconstructioncentre.co.uk/flood-advice/flood-risks-in-the-uk.html Although they are rare events, the UK is not immune from Tsunamis. Some 7-8000 years ago a 20 metre high wave hit Scotland caused by a landslip in Norway, and the balance of probability is that the Great Flood of 1607 that devastated the coasts of the Bristol Channel and caused 2,000 deaths was a tsunami triggered by an earthquake in a seismic fault off the coast of southern Ireland. Eyewitness accounts of the disaster, published in six different pamphlets of the time, told of "huge and mighty hills of water" advancing at a speed "faster than a greyhound can run" and only receding 10 days later. Cardiff was the most badly affected town. The coasts of Devon and the Somerset Levels as far inland as Glastonbury Tor, 14 miles from the coast, were also affected. There remain plaques up to 8ft above ground level to show how high the waters rose on the walls of surviving churches. In their 2001 paper published in the American Geophysical Union, Steven Ward and Simon Day suggested that during a future eruption, the Cumbre Vieja volcano in La Palma may experience a catastrophic failure of its west flank that would trigger a tsunami capable of travelling across the Atlantic arriving at the East coast of the United States as a 10-25 metre tidal wave. What their model also shows is that, triggered by the same event, a tidal wave of up to 7 metres would reach the southwest of the UK, which, when funnelled by the topography of the Severn estuary could devastate the same areas that were hit in 1607. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 I don't claim to be in full possession of the facts but I'm more than capable of reading what others have reported. I've not heard of any deaths as a result of radiation, those that died at the plant did so as a result of fire until proven otherwise. Maybe the Japanese source is going off the assumtion that at least one of the people tasked with stopping things from getting worse will die some time in the future (due to the numbers and risk involved) perhaps that's the policy. To actually have people measuring levels of radiation with the corden is a total waste of time and puts people at unnecessary risk- radiation suits are good but they will not be infallible and have problems with keeping air-tightness. The only priority of those inside the corden should be to stop things from getting worse. I don't have a problem with someone measuring radiation levels at the corden in a radiation suit but that wasn't what you said, in fact that would be a good thing- as it means they can adapt the corden as necessary. If they have the capabilities to have measurement of the radiation levels without the need for someone in a radiaition suit then fine but I wouldn't presume they do (for example they may have gotten damaged). I don't know how things are progressing but I have some knowledge of how things have gone. I wouldn't assume that the reason increased levels of radiation is as a result of a big escape- for example how often is it measured, if you measure it more than you would normally there is a good chance that it will go up by accident. My point is that graphs like the one you found somewhere- I gave you credit for finding it (hence the yours)- are not wholly representative of the entire picture. Yes the limit for radition workers is an average of 20mSv per year over 5 years but in reality their are measures to control for it outside the standard ones. I didn't need a BMJ article to tell me what an sievert is, I have an A in A-level physics to do that. Not to mention the 90 minute lecture I've had in medical school a few years ago, plus the afternoon on managment of events like this. I don't claim to be an expert, I know a couple though- my brother is a nuclear engineer and my future sister-in-law is a medical physicist. I'm going to see them over the weekend so I'll ask them as part of general conversation. If there was ever a more urgent need for me to brush up on my nuclear risks then I know who to call. I've got a more pressing reason to brush up on my physics but you will find out about that in due course (a reader or two on here already know as they know me). Incidentally my scientific background is better than yours as I've already got the same level of degree and have now done enough credits to guarantee me a post-grad qualification on my way to a MSc. Or, to put it quite simply: How to make yourself sound like a right arsehole in 1,500 words or less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueJazzer Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 If someone crashed a truck containing nuclear material or waste in Manchester (unlikely, as Manc is a nuclear free city which means said trucks arent allowed in) then i would be the guy wandering about in a Gas Tight Suit with a dosimeter and a survey meter trying to put out the fire, rescue the driver and any other poor bastard he crashed into, and make the scene safe. So I think that top trumps the pair of you. I dont have an A level in physics, and it was a hell of a long time since i did my GCSE's..... however, i've had a damn site more than a 90 minute lecture on radiation! So i'm waving my willy and its bigger than both of yours put together! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueJazzer Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 News just in............. The BBC have approached oafc0000 and Rudemedic to play Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson in a time travelling tsunami battered Japan based nuclear disaster TV movie........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 News just in............. The BBC have approached oafc0000 and Rudemedic to play Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson in a time travelling tsunami battered Japan based nuclear disaster TV movie........ Fine but I am Holmes... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Is it possible that I've been affected by radiation damage? I watched the coverage of the Tsunami on TV basically all day Friday. I felt fine for a while at the football on Saturday, but at about 2 or 3 on Sunday morning I began to feel like :censored:, and I've not felt that great ever since. There were lots of Japanese people out in Soho when I was there too. I'm feeling much better now so the dosage must have been quite low. Thanks for your help though doctors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 I'm feeling much better now so the dosage must have been quite low. Thanks for your help though doctors. That's the story you are trying to spin to the missus. I bet you are still at level warning 11 though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_mighty_bosh Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 All the best KC and anyone else affected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudemedic Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 If someone crashed a truck containing nuclear material or waste in Manchester (unlikely, as Manc is a nuclear free city which means said trucks arent allowed in) then i would be the guy wandering about in a Gas Tight Suit with a dosimeter and a survey meter trying to put out the fire, rescue the driver and any other poor bastard he crashed into, and make the scene safe. So I think that top trumps the pair of you. I dont have an A level in physics, and it was a hell of a long time since i did my GCSE's..... however, i've had a damn site more than a 90 minute lecture on radiation! So i'm waving my willy and its bigger than both of yours put together! ROFL- I reckon you might have come across my Dad if you've been doing that for a while, but I don't know how much you deal with bacteria/viral warfare? My lecture on radiation essentially boiled down to this is radiation it has consequences, don't over use it. But fair play to you in that job you need cahones the size of a house and if the situation were to ever occur then you are probably going to be the most important person (or one of the team as I guess there is a bunch of you) in Manchester, if not the country. (I hope that doesn't come across as patronising, if it does then I apologise). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudemedic Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Fine but I am Holmes... Fine I reckon Watson is often the better part anyway, especially in the Guy Ritchie one and the one which was on telly where that bloke from the office played Watson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razza699 Posted March 17, 2011 Author Share Posted March 17, 2011 I once did an experiment with hydrochloric acid and some explosive material can I join in ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 I once did an experiment with hydrochloric acid and some explosive material can I join in ? Sure.... but you might fall short of the wannabe doctors high standards Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.