Live data from Hacker News

Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

ready.gov

121–130 of 188 posts

Re: Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

#121
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, a government that takes 50%+ of my income producing this kind of garbage-level content scares me more than COVID ever did. What the fuck am I/are we paying for?

Hey, they're also producing the nuclear weapons. :)

Are they though? I’m not exactly confident those work anymore. Our subs keep crashing in to underwater mountains.

Re: Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

#123

I thought this was satire, but then I saw the .gov We are living in a satire universe folks.

The US govt is literally adopting the dumbest takes on Twitter[1] as official policy. [1] https://twitter.com/DanaHoule/status/1496723469890949127

As far as I can tell, this person is not in government [1] and is not claiming to represent anyone but themselves. I don't understand how you conclude that their comment is US govt policy.

[1] https://newrepublic.com/authors/dana-houle

Re: Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

#124
Remember kids: In case of global thermonuclear war be sure to wash your hands, cover your face, and keep 6 feet of distance between you and the other survivors who just received lethal doses of radiation.

--

“A fire broke out backstage in a theatre. The clown came out to warn the public; they thought it was a joke and applauded. He repeated it; the acclaim was even greater. I think that's just how the world will come to an end: to general applause from wits who believe it's a joke.”

- Soren Kierkegaard, Either/Or, Part I (1843)

Re: Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

#125
post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey, they're also producing the nuclear weapons. :)

Are they though? I’m not exactly confident those work anymore. Our subs keep crashing in to underwater mountains.

That's not the fault of the subs, it's the sleep deprived and overworked crews, and inexperienced and also sleep deprived officers manning them. Our ICBMs will work perfectly when they are accidentally launched.

Re: Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

#126
Curious as to why there is no mention of having and taking Potassium Iodide?

"The FDA has approved two different forms of KI (potassium iodide), tablets and liquid, that people can take by mouth after a radiation emergency involving radioactive iodine." If there was a radiation emergency, people should take a drug that would help protect them from thyroid cancer.

Re: Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

#127

I am genuinely asking; how worried should we be? I'm really freaking out about this...

I wouldn’t be too worried. The best things you can do to prepare are often the same kinds of other disaster prep you should do. Have a couple of weeks of water stored safely in your house. Have a small emergency supply of food. Have a well stocked first aid kit (watch for expirations). Have a battery powered portable radio. Look at ready.gov for a checklist: https://www.ready.gov/kit Such a kit will have the high val…

(Adding on) If doing stuff helps you with worrying, then assembling the emergency kit is a pretty good thing to do. Chances are, you won't need it for nuclear war, but having it will help you be prepared for other emergencies that are probably more likely, too.

Re: Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

#128

The comments here are silly. You can absolutely prioritize your risks, which means you’re not precluded from taking sensible precautions if you’re able to. This isn’t rock/paper/scissors. If you’re far enough away from the point of impact and the winds are right, Covid might be more of a threat than a nuclear bomb. If you’re two states away from where a bomb goes off, and insist on open-mouth kissing strangers as the…

No, what's silly is filling people's heads with rubbish about COVID in case of a nuclear disaster or other acute emergency. Hand sanitizer is absolutely not the right thing to be concerned with. Masks perhaps, but not for COVID. Storing clean water, minimizing your perishable food waste, securing your house/shelter and making makeshift repairs to damage, using a radio (e.g., from your car) to listen for information,…

Remember kids, the best time to needlessly contract a disease is right after a nuclear blast has rendered any aid completely inaccessible.

Also considering that one of the parts that suggests hand sanitizer says the following

If you are able to, set aside items like soap, hand sanitizer that contains at least 60 percent alcohol, disinfecting wipes, and general household cleaning supplies that you can use to disinfect surfaces you touch regularly. *After a flood*, you may not have access to these supplies for days or even weeks. Keep in mind each person’s specific needs, including medication. Don’t forget the needs of pets. Obtain extra batteries and charging devices for phones and other critical equipment.

The "After a flood" part makes me think this is just general disaster preparedness and has nothing at all to do with COVID.

Edit: There was another part about hand sanitizer that was much more COVID-19 related that I missed the first time, my mistake. But the entire page looks like a copy-pasted frankenstein.

Re: Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

#129

The comments here are silly. You can absolutely prioritize your risks, which means you’re not precluded from taking sensible precautions if you’re able to. This isn’t rock/paper/scissors. If you’re far enough away from the point of impact and the winds are right, Covid might be more of a threat than a nuclear bomb. If you’re two states away from where a bomb goes off, and insist on open-mouth kissing strangers as the…

No, the page is truly absurd. It mixes things up so much that you can't even tell why you're supposed to be doing something like wearing a mask. What kind? Gas mask? Cloth mask? Why?

The page is useless as is.

Re: Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

#130

The comments here are silly. You can absolutely prioritize your risks, which means you’re not precluded from taking sensible precautions if you’re able to. This isn’t rock/paper/scissors. If you’re far enough away from the point of impact and the winds are right, Covid might be more of a threat than a nuclear bomb. If you’re two states away from where a bomb goes off, and insist on open-mouth kissing strangers as the…

Wearing a mask also seems sensible to keep the radioactive fallout out of your lungs and thanks to Covid, most people have masks on their person most of the time right now. If you survive the initial blast, fallout is the thing that you need to be weary off and radioactive dust is just nasty. Your concern right after that should be staying safe, cleaning up, and minimizing the risk off radiation sickness, cancer, etc. The article does a good job of giving you some simple hints here of what might be helpful here. The covid thing is just ass coverage, I guess. It's the modern equivalent of making sure the deck chairs are properly arranged on the Titanic. It's not going to be a primary concern for anyone right after a nuclear attack.
Post reply on HN