Liverpool FC Forum

by **Bman** » Thu Jul 13, 2006 10:31 pm

Well strike me down with an x-ray.

I have just finished watching horizon on BBC2 and it was all about Radiation. I didnt know this but back in the 1920 & 30's scientists and the public generally believed Radiation was good for you ! They said it had almost become fashionable in parts of the world to drop a lump of Urainium in a jug of water, chill it overnight and then drink it the next day. It was believed it would get rid of headaches and make you feel better.

Obviously by the 40's scientists now thought Radiation was actually a killer. The atom bomb dropped on Hiroshima (sp) was evident that radiation caused an immediate impact on life and genetically too. If you were within a close proximaty from the blast you were exposed to higher levels of radiation than those further away from initial impact.

Also Chernobyl in 1986, was another scare for people by now with "radiophobyia". I think they said on the programme that the radiation levels were nothing compared to that of Hiroshima. And from a possible 500,000 or so people something like 57 actually died from radioactivity. In the press and I suppose in general people believe those numbers would be more, epecially 57. By the way 57 people was scientifically proven to die directly from Chernobyl, (caused by radiation). They were people who came in to clean up the after effects i.e get rid of rubbish and clean up the site.

It wasnt until some years later scientists decided to retrieve wildlife from around Chernobyl. They instantly thought these animals, mice, feerits and hedgehogs etc would be genetically mutated I suppose. They thought there cells would be infected and the animals would be in a bad way.
But no, they were fine. After being exposed to something like 8000 x-rays a day for god knows how many years these animals and there cells were fine.

Since then scientists have seen what low levels of radiation do to human beings. They know obviously high levels can trigger some cancers. And cause birth defects. But they dont know what low levels do really. It was shown in certain populated areas in and around the world that people that are exposed to higher than average levels of radiation will actually lower there risk of cancer. As the radiation level apparently stimulates these cells instead of killing them.

It appears scientists have almost gone full circle with this, since the 20's & 30's to drinking radiation. Onwards to the 40's & 50's with nuclear bombs and the worry of nuclear power stations. Now the they reckon lower levels can actually be good rather than bad for humans. Interesting huh ?

So- called " experts" are forever doing this to us, one minute there on telly saying tomatoe ketchups bad for you. The next week there telling you it could prevent cancer. Salt is another one, too much hardens the arterys one week, the next there saying we can have more with our meals. They do this with foods especially and other things, they're always moving the goal posts on us. Next they'll find that carrots are bad for you (by the way how do you know there not ?) and smoking cigarettes and eating mcDonalds is good for you. Can you see where I'm comig from ?

So I ask what is an " expert" ?

by **woof woof !** » Thu Jul 13, 2006 10:36 pm

Bman wrote:smoking cigarettes and eating mcDonalds is good for you. Can you see where I'm comig from ?

Erm.......the Pub ?

by **Bman** » Thu Jul 13, 2006 10:39 pm

woof woof ! wrote:
Bman wrote:smoking cigarettes and eating mcDonalds is good for you. Can you see where I'm comig from ?

Erm.......the Pub ?

No, but I think I'll head there now, by a pack of B&H and grab a macky d's on the way. In some hope of curing my cold.

by **JC_81** » Thu Jul 13, 2006 10:41 pm

I am dubious of such things myself. Recent research apparently shows that drinking green tea is good for you - protects against heart disease/strokes etc. My ma got wind of this and has been drinking copious amounts of the stuff - which tastes like sh.it by the way. I keep saying don't be stupid - it's only a matter of time before they tell you that even if it protects against those things, it probably causes some sort of cancer or some other disease... :no

by **adamnbarrett** » Thu Jul 13, 2006 10:49 pm

I watched that horizon aswell. It was quite interesting TBH. I know what you mean about these 'experts'. They do seem to change the story each week. IMO I think these 'experts' do not really know themselves. They see that it contains something bad in and automatically say it is bad for you even if it may have things that are good for yourself.

The thing is all this testing on animals will not prove anything IMO. Dogs, cats etc are different from us. Different animals may react differently than we would. The thing is, experiments are not conducted on humans so we won't know how it effects us. It may extend a lifespan of a sheep for example but it may kill us.

So in a nutshell, we don't know.

by **jonnymac1979** » Thu Jul 13, 2006 11:44 pm

I've heard a glass of red wine a day is good for you. Anyone else heard that?

What if you drank a bottle a day?

by **Mark 23** » Thu Jul 13, 2006 11:48 pm

There is so much information out there from a whole host of sources, saying detox your body, it's the way to go if you want a healthy life, then they are saying don't. Proper pisses me off all this.

by **taff** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 12:17 am

jonnymac1979 wrote:I've heard a glass of red wine a day is good for you. Anyone else heard that?

What if you drank a bottle a day?

In the bordeaux area of France they have a very fatty diet but one of the lowest heart attack rates in Europe and the theory is red wine and garlic which supposedly are good for you

Mind you theories can get berserk, my neighbour smoked like a chimney and seemed to be constantly drunk every day mainly on whisky

by **account deleted by request** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 1:06 am

If you dont drink alcohol or milk, dont eat meat or dairy products dont smoke and dont go out you will live longer or at least it will fkn seem like it.

by **Lando_Griffin** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 3:50 am

Even many"healthy" foods are bad for you if you over-indulge.

By the same token, kebabs are ok once in a while.

by **woof woof !** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 9:06 am

taff wrote:Mind you theories can get berserk, my neighbour smoked like a chimney and seemed to be constantly drunk every day mainly on whisky

Notice you're using the past tense Taff .

by **dawson99** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 9:09 am

my great aunt smoked 40 woodbines a day, lived to 102. mr gymn was famous in america and thanks to bill hicks, ran every day, never smoked, drank or ate red meat, died of a heart attack at about 40 while out...running!!!

by **Judge** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 9:20 am

jonnymac1979 wrote:I've heard a glass of red wine a day is good for you. Anyone else heard that?

What if you drank a bottle a day?

yes jmac, its part of the medditeranean diet fella. Plus it acts as an anti-oxident, which mops up dangerous free-radicals in the body. Chocolate in moderation also is an anti-oxident (that will please the fatties on here

)

good for your heart, but not the whole bottle a day thing, just a glass a day with dinner

message to adam barrett - see this post about chocolate

by **adamnbarrett** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 9:27 am

Anyone else hear that dark chocolate is supposed to be good for you?

by **Sabre** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 9:50 am

Good post, I think radition we'll be sold again as a friend of humanity. Spain decided not to develop more nuclear powerstations due to the risk it supposed. But once the government realised that there's no way to fulfill the energy requirements with the current dependency on oil, they're selling now the safety of fission nuclear power so that the people accept it better.

Oil is scarce and will be too expensive, and until the time fussion / clean energy tech is developed, we'll have to rely on fission nuclear power, the one we know. I think there's a massive campaign to wash the image of this kind of energy, and some will even say that at some levels it's good for health. I don't think so. But I think that it will be necessary to rely on nuclear energy in the coming 50 years.

Liverpool FC Forum

What is am expert ?

Who is online