OT: Heart warming

Good summary of the technical issues. I had not come across the Taiwan example before, so thanks for that. It almost seems too good to be true (30-fold reduction in cancer?) Although it is a good sized sample over a fairly long period, it will be interesting to see what lifetime results are, if these are ever followed up properly.

On other matters, true gentlemen never discuss politics or religion, of course

There's this, if you want to wade through it:

I did look into it a about thirty years ago, following the upsurge in alarmist reports and the building regs insistence that under-floor areas be forcibly ventilated. Cowboys flourished! I found a Europe-wide study that showed that for non-smokers there was no significant risk at radon levels commonly encountered in houses, but the risk was slightly elevated for cancer smokers. I haven't got the link any more. Wade Allison comes to a similar conclusion (Radiation and Reason, pp 122-126)

I think it is more common than popularly supposed. This is cancer researches take...

Of course its hopelessly simplistic. How can you tell when its caused by ionising radiation, as against sheer bad luck

Why on earth would it be in the governments interest to do that?

The watermelons have had their foot on the nuclear brakes for so long, nothing to do with nuclear is worth the political risk, unless (as is being understood to be the case) there really is no alternative.

Mostly governments talk as much as possible, and do as little as possible and really have no interest in results beyond the ballot box, and that is why we need a ballot box, and freedom of speech. If people block the M25 demanding reactors, we might get some, but if people vote in droves for an Atomic Party, the government will act.

As they did with UKIP.

If you want nuclear, what you have to do is to start conversations everywhere about it, and stop worrying about whether or not being a woman is a choice, rather than a biological imperative.

Change the agenda from lunatic woke Marxist inspired ideology, to pragmatic discussions about real issues.

Then start to vote against the power that be, until they do what is needful

And always remember, you greatest democratic right is to spend your money as you see fit, which is why the communists and socialists want to take it away, so they can spend it as they see fit. On your behalf, and in the best possible taste, and subject to to 370,000 oversight committees and watchdogs to make sure it isn't pocketed or misspent of course.....oh dear there isn't any left after we paid all those people to oversee how it was spent. Bleak House & Jarndyce versus Jarndyce.

Refuse to have a smart meter, refuse to buy an electric car, refuse to install a solar panel,refuse to install heat pump, boycott funds specialising in 'green' stocks and invest in ones funding nuclear power.. Don't replace anything with anything 'green' unless its actually better.

If green isn't making a profit, there won't be any green.

Yes, that is pretty much what I remember reading too.

The problem is that as with most things, the people who know a lot are countable on the fingers of one hand, and by and large what 'everybody knows;' is a very distorted and approximate and probably twenty years out of date view.

And what ArtStudents and other politicians know is effectively nothing at all, because its all done with emotional narratives anyway.