managing radiation risk is important, at least for "human factors". in fact we can easily detect radiation burst much before the radiation get dangerous, and even before they get above the crazy regulation of today. (regulation is totally off the reality, ignoring the now multiple proved threshold effects)
I've proposed DGT (without response, but i'm not surprised, maybe they did it) to add a simple Geiger captor shutting down the reactor in case of abnormal burst... a kind of anti-witch system. about questioning, I feel that DGT have much more data on that subject, and did make measures on the long term. however I'm more concern, like defkalion seems, about Hydrogen security. anyway, 2grams of hydrogen is probably more manageable than the 10kg of prototypes hydrogen cars. I don't know how to compare the danger of 2g hydrogen with a butane bottle, like you find in houses. many houses explode every year because of gas, and gas furnace are not forbidden... however there is , like H, a strong regulation. from the data we have, radiation protection will be mostly a psychiatric problem. anyway, we have to check with torture test (as some explained here). about animal, it seems now clear that animal, an humans, are not good radiation captors. the dose to have noticeable at short term , and even long term effect is very high. (1Sv for short term effect, 200mSv for long term, all at high flux). there is even new (and old, but ignored) proofs that threshold effect linked to thermal shock proteins, and following repair system, make zero or negative risk, for low or slow doses. in tchernobyl the few dozens of "suicide firemen" survived above 80%, and with recently discovered radiation cure protocole, maybe they would all have survived with less cancer than average vodka drinker. psychiatric problems were the worst real problems, sadly ignored. like with antennas, we should not ignore the psychiatric factor, which is dominant. 2012/1/5 Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> > Mary Yugo <maryyu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> No radioactivity at all has ever been found in any other than the very >> first Rossi experiment and it has been looked for each time. >> > > There are several problems with this: > ... >
