The Woman Who Ate Chernobyl's Apples • Hacker News Board

Re: The Woman Who Ate Chernobyl's Apples

#51

Post by Ntrails » Wed, Apr 22, 2015, 9:55 AM UTC

rustsucks wrote: post #39

personlurking wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understood that the two people ate a sandwich and a little girl. I'm glad that wasn't the case. This part seemed quite crazy, though: "She was buried in a common cemetery in Goiânia, in a special fiberglass coffin lined with lead to prevent the spread of radiation. Despite these measures, there was still a riot in the cemetery where over 2,000 people, fearing that her corpse would poison the surrounding area, tried…

It seems hard to understand in our eyes, but you have to appreciate the lack of education and superstition in Brazil. If you ever read the famous feedback from Feynman about the standard of teaching in Brazil (shit) then you would know why.

I think it's fairly patronising to blame poor education for mistrust of government safety assurances with respect to radiation?

I'm not saying that the coffin was insufficient protection, but I know I don't know enough to be sure. So the question is not "am I well informed enough to judge the risk" (and in a country with good education standards and having studied physics to 18 I probably have a relatively decent education) but rather "do i believe that the person who made that judgement was".

Re: The Woman Who Ate Chernobyl's Apples

#52

Post by kingkawn » Wed, Apr 22, 2015, 10:04 AM UTC

Ntrails wrote: post #51

rustsucks wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems hard to understand in our eyes, but you have to appreciate the lack of education and superstition in Brazil. If you ever read the famous feedback from Feynman about the standard of teaching in Brazil (shit) then you would know why.

I think it's fairly patronising to blame poor education for mistrust of government safety assurances with respect to radiation? I'm not saying that the coffin was insufficient protection, but I know I don't know enough to be sure. So the question is not "am I well informed enough to judge the risk" (and in a country with good education standards and having studied physics to 18 I probably have a relatively decent edu…

A logical process that no doubt is a result of being well educated

Re: The Woman Who Ate Chernobyl's Apples

#53

Post by nakedrobot2 » Wed, Apr 22, 2015, 10:06 AM UTC

rdtsc wrote: post #31

ehmmm wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One her comments: well, if its over 100 mSv/h, then acute radiation sickness begins after ~2 hours (noticable reduced blood cell count from 200 mSv acute dose onward, though you'd only FEEL sick after another 3 or 4 hours). but yeah, as the inverse square law applies, there's nothing to fear with this particle. and yep, the spectrum was done by a HPGe, as usual. :)

I think the key was if that was the dose to the total body area not just from a single grain in her hand. Imagine being covered in those grains for 1 hour that would be the equivalent.

And what happens if you "only" irradiate your hand? Presumably some of the alpha/beta particles can go into your blood and then to the rest of your body?

what damage is being done by holding that grain?

Re: The Woman Who Ate Chernobyl's Apples

#54

Post by TheOtherHobbes » Wed, Apr 22, 2015, 10:07 AM UTC

gadders wrote: post #49

m0skit0 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One was in 1986 and the other in 2011, so I would expect the safety to be better in the second one. Both were INES Level 7. And Fukushima hasn't killed anyone... yet.

There was no "yet" with Chernobyl. People died within weeks.

There is a "not yet" with Fukushima.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disas...

As usual with long-term exposure, cause of death becomes a statistical and actuarial question.

Incidentally, Chernobyl almost sterilised large areas of Europe and Russia. One of the official documentaries explains what would have happened if the initial suicide squad efforts had failed - it would have been far worse than anything in history.

Re: The Woman Who Ate Chernobyl's Apples

#55

Post by 69_years_and » Wed, Apr 22, 2015, 10:10 AM UTC

VilleSalonen wrote: post #30

69_years_and wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like everyone and their dog has a radiation detector in Russia esp. around Chernobyl, not something ones sees in the west.

Don't know about radiation detectors in Russia but Chernobyl is located in Ukraine, not Russia.

My bad. Sadly or luckily it's close to being exactly on other side of the world from me and while I do use maps to help me place things, this time I didn't or if I have in the past, I've forgotten (it happens).

Re: The Woman Who Ate Chernobyl's Apples

#56

Post by minikites » Wed, Apr 22, 2015, 10:11 AM UTC

jsprogrammer wrote: post #28

chokolad wrote: post #26

seriously, 6 foot long catfish is a radioactive freak now? I lived in Uzbekistan from the time I was born (1976) till about 1990 and six foot catfish was really big but not uncommon. I have a photo of my dad holding 5 feet one by the gills somewhere in my albums (dated before 1976 for sure). I remember my dad buying smoked catfish slices about 5-7 inches across, those definitely came from pretty damn big specimens. A…

If you watch the video, she says the size of the catfish is most likely due to them having no predators.

You don't even have to watch the video, it's right there in the article.

Re: The Woman Who Ate Chernobyl's Apples

#57

Post by jaimebuelta » Wed, Apr 22, 2015, 10:11 AM UTC

m0skit0 wrote: post #37

I wonder, maybe someone can answer: why is Chernobyl still remembered while nobody talks about Fukushima anymore?

I think we still remember Fukushima just fine at the moment. Chernobyl happened 20 years before, and had also some extra component of "media interest", being in the USSR at a particular point in time. And also a lot of initial secrecy, which made everyone extremely nervous.

In terms of "nuclear disaster", Chernobyl was also several orders of magnitude bigger.

Fukushima was the product of a HUGE natural disaster (an earthquake and tsunami) that killed 15K people, and the effect of nuclear power plant problem has been pretty limited compared with that. Chernobyl was solely a problem on the power plant that produced everything, including actual deaths by radiation, the permanent evacuation of a whole town, involvement of a lot of workers that received quite high radiation levels, and a measurable lasting effect on the surroundings. It also was pretty close to be a much bigger problem.

They are both very very important nuclear incidents which should be taken seriously. And they are remembered because of that. Chernobyl, though, was much more dangerous and uncontrolled.

In the big scheme of things, they are dwarfed in impact for huge natural disasters like Haiti's earthquake in 2010 or the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami. Nuclear power and radiation has this especial meaning for us that makes us fear it more than other things.

Re: The Woman Who Ate Chernobyl's Apples

#58

Post by creshal » Wed, Apr 22, 2015, 10:11 AM UTC

frik wrote: post #17

curiously wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

or the game s.t.a.l.k.e.r

Parent meant the famous PC game: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.T.A.L.K.E.R.:_Shadow_of_Chern... The background and some terminology of the game ("The Zone", "Stalker") are borrowed from the popular science fiction novella Roadside Picnic by Boris and Arkady Strugatsky and the 1979 Andrei Tarkovsky film Stalker that was loosely based on it, as well as Stalker, the film's subsequent novelization by the original author…

Very, very loosely based on.

Re: The Woman Who Ate Chernobyl's Apples

#59

Post by 13 » Wed, Apr 22, 2015, 10:12 AM UTC

gadders wrote: post #49

m0skit0 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One was in 1986 and the other in 2011, so I would expect the safety to be better in the second one. Both were INES Level 7. And Fukushima hasn't killed anyone... yet.

There was no "yet" with Chernobyl. People died within weeks.

People died within minutes.

Re: The Woman Who Ate Chernobyl's Apples

#60

Post by moopling » Wed, Apr 22, 2015, 10:34 AM UTC

nakedrobot2 wrote: post #53

rdtsc wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the key was if that was the dose to the total body area not just from a single grain in her hand. Imagine being covered in those grains for 1 hour that would be the equivalent.

And what happens if you "only" irradiate your hand? Presumably some of the alpha/beta particles can go into your blood and then to the rest of your body? what damage is being done by holding that grain?

The gigacounter predicts the sieverts/h based on the local amount of radiation and by assuming that is the dosage all parts of your body are exposed to. If significantly less of your body is actually exposed to that level of radiation the actual dosage you receive will be less than predicted.