politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
This isn't a rule that promotes safety. It's a rule that assuages the fears of anti-nuclear activists with no meaningful difference between this and other standards in terms of danger. "As low as reasonably achievable" means that even if there is seemingly no return from a safety perspective, you still need to reduce not just radiation emission, but exposure time. It assumes that radiation is lifetime accumulating and that there is no safe level of radiation exposure, even though that doesn't match the science.
Say, for instance, you have a nuclear reactor that exposes employees to the same amount of radiation from having a banana in their pocket during work hours would. There is a new type of radiation shielding that can be retrofitted to the reactor to reduce that by 10x. There is already no danger due to radiation exposure. ALARA states that you should undergo the retrofit, since it is possible to reduce the level of exposure, even though there is no difference in danger between now and that hypothetical future where you have the new shielding.
https://youtu.be/KT5hYHdelmg
... isn't that true though?
"Safe" is relative. Any radiation exposure has a small chance to cause cancer. We consider a few x-rays not harmful, but just because the chance is generally worth taking for the results.
It's the reason the person taking the X-ray is behind lead or a wall.
Yes, that is the way that the entire industry, from X-ray machines to NASA astronauts, is run. ALARA and the Linear No Threshold model are standard in the industry. The issue is that the science disagrees with the need to take those extreme precautions.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2663584/
Basically, ALARA and Linear No Threshold assumes that radiation is a novel danger and we must treat it as though our bodies have no mechanism for dealing with it. But our living world is absolutely steeped in radiation and we have obvious biological responses to those threats as a result. Like getting sunburnt. The sun didn't burn you, your skin cells voluntarily told your body to kill them because they were irradiated. We also have less extreme mechanisms of DNA repair for lower doses. Meaning there is actually a minimum dose needed for you to be in any kind of danger.