Wh.......at? You are leaving crucial information out as you do frequently. The key is the word casualty. Black lung is bad but not nearly as terminal as soon as silicosis in lead and zinc mines and the kill ratio in the Uranium mines was 100%. I guess you mean they all died eventually or are you spouting industry stats?
I don't know about how early the Uranium miners died but I suspect it has to do with you wattage stats but that would be just speculation. I was around mining stats for years and companies just make up things. They told us the tailing ponds were safe to swim in but my mom said that she would spank us both if she ever heard of it. Today, we have enough lead in our bones without having emersed ourselves in that beautiful clear lead water. They are still OK ing the water for drinking which is highly suspect even today. If there is more radioactivity in coal tailings than in uranium then why did the only thing killing us in those strip mine swimming holes was eating too soon and drowning or the water moccassins? On the other hand all of those Navajo kids have cancer from swimming in the tailing water. Facts like these are the big reasons that the conservatives want to do away with PBS. They call PBS prejudiced towards environmentalists. Indian people call them the only good thing going. REH ----- Original Message ----- From: "Harry Pollard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 12:01 AM Subject: RE: [Futurework] Lovely low level radiation? Proposal for new Whitehouse dinnerware > Lawry, > > The casualty rate for uranium miners is about the same as coal miners. > However, far less uranium is required than coal than for same wattage. > > I'm not sure how much less, but I do know that the wattage that fills one > truck of uranium waste, fills 35,000 trucks with coal waste. > > Oh, yes. There's more radioactivity in the coal waste than in the uranium > waste, but who knows where it goes? > > Harry > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Lawrence wrote: > > >I would guess that if uranium miners are radioactive, it would be because > >they inhaled radioactive particles that are embedded in their lungs. But > >irradiated food does not take in any radioactive particles, as I understand > >it: it just receives radiation that kills germs (I guess?) but is left > >uncontaminated itself, after the exposure. E.g. when I have an x-ray, I am > >not left contaminated. If I inhale a plutonium particle, I am in serious > >trouble. > > > >Cheers, > >L > > > **************************************************** > Harry Pollard > Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles > Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 > Tel: (818) 352-4141 -- Fax: (818) 353-2242 > http://home.attbi.com/~haledward > **************************************************** > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.484 / Virus Database: 282 - Release Date: 5/27/2003 > _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
