Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

octoberlib

(14,971 posts)
Tue Oct 2, 2018, 04:05 PM Oct 2018

Oh, FFS! APNewsBreak: Trump's EPA moving to loosen radiation limits

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration is quietly moving to weaken U.S. radiation regulations, turning to scientific outliers who argue that a bit of radiation damage is actually good for you — like a little bit of sunlight.

The government’s current, decades-old guidance says that any exposure to harmful radiation is a cancer risk. And critics say the proposed change could lead to higher levels of exposure for workers at nuclear installations and oil and gas drilling sites, medical workers doing X-rays and CT scans, people living next to Superfund sites and any members of the public who one day might find themselves exposed to a radiation release.

The Trump administration already has targeted a range of other regulations on toxins and pollutants, including coal power plant emissions and car exhaust, that it sees as costly and burdensome for businesses. Supporters of the EPA’s new radiation guidance argue the government’s current no-tolerance rule for radiation damage forces unnecessary spending for handling exposure in accidents, at nuclear plants, in medical centers and at other sites.

“This would have a positive effect on human health as well as save billions and billions and billions of dollars,” Edward Calabrese, a toxicologist at the University of Massachusetts, said in 2016. He was to be the lead witness at a congressional hearing Wednesday on EPA’s push for what it calls transparency in science.The proposed rule would require regulators to consider “various threshold models across the exposure range” when it comes to dangerous substances.


https://apnews.com/6a573b6b020e453c90ecd5e84aa23f57?utm_medium=AP&utm_source=Twitter&utm_campaign=SocialFlow&__twitter_impression=true

13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

awesomerwb1

(4,268 posts)
1. What's the harm with a little extra
Tue Oct 2, 2018, 04:07 PM
Oct 2018

radiation, mercury and asbestos in your lives?

Wimps!! Don't knock it till you try it!

octoberlib

(14,971 posts)
2. He's trying to kill us all and will probably succeed.
Tue Oct 2, 2018, 04:12 PM
Oct 2018

He must not give a crap about his grandchildren.

donkeypoofed

(2,187 posts)
6. Cause a little radiation is healthy for you,they say !
Tue Oct 2, 2018, 04:38 PM
Oct 2018

Then put those dumb bastards in a room with some and let's see how they like it. Somebody is lining their pockets over this !

anarch

(6,535 posts)
8. radiation is good for you? Where have I heard this before...
Tue Oct 2, 2018, 04:49 PM
Oct 2018

So, yeah, it basically sounds like J. Frank Parnell from "Repo Man" is calling the shots at EPA these days...



angrychair

(8,733 posts)
11. Putting lead in your wine
Tue Oct 2, 2018, 04:57 PM
Oct 2018

Helps you think...

These are the type of things that get at me more than some others. Junk science and the insistence to perpetuate things we know know not to be true.

It’s like we are living in an alternate reality all of a sudden. It’s like I went to sleep on Earth 1 on November 8 and woke up on Earth 1001 on November 9th.
Sometimes I just have to walk away from the internet and tune out and this is one of those times.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Oh, FFS! APNewsBreak: Tru...