re: #127 SixDegrees

No more hell than is paid now, as already noted, for the use of conventional sources of energy.

And I don’t know what article you’re reading - it certainly isn’t the one you originally cited, which reaches no such conclusion.

If that wasn’t the conclusion, then what was it? No higher incidence of childhood leukemia than anywhere else? Than why the elaborate hypothesis of ‘population mixing?’ To prove or disprove exactly what?

Let’s try it again, from another governmental report:

The incidence of childhood leukemia around the La Hague nuclear waste reprocessing plant (France): a survey for the years 1978-1998

CONCLUSION—This study indicates an increased incidence of leukemia in the area situated at less than 10 km from the plant. Monitoring and further investigations should be targeted at acute lymphoblastic leukemia occurring during the childhood incidence peak (before 10 years) in children living near the La Hague site and may be (sic) other nuclear reprocessing plants.

Source:

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

But let’s drop it here, otherwise we’ll be going around and around forever. Thankfully, we’ve kept it more or less to ourselves and civil. I’d be happy if we could leave it that way. Put in a last word if you like, but short of your suggesting the installation of a mini-reactor under my bed, I’m going remain mum on the subject for the present.