There are very good reasons why private industry, universities, science clubs and government agencies eagerly downplay the dangers of and adamantly defend the use of technology regularly and rampantly oozing ionizing radiation. On the seemingly positive side, this technology creates thousands of jobs and brings in billions of dollars in profit. In the area of medical imaging, the technology also saves millions of lives and makes medical diagnostics much easier for doctors, which of course benefits many patients.
In the case of nuclear power plants (NPPs), it also provides massive amounts of "dirty" energy which would otherwise have to be produced most probably using fossil fuels. This would indeed be wonderful news if NPPs were as safe and clean as is often claimed . . . though Chernobyl, Three Mile Island and, worst of all, Fukushima, have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that, at best, the authorities have been childishly and unscientifically optimistic!
As for why they downplay the dangers of ionizing radiation, well, there is neither a justification nor any positive reasoning. In fact, there are only two reasons that come to mind: blatant greed and the certainty that the public is too ignorant, too stupid and/or too uninvolved to care about the far-reaching and inescapable repercussions.
The problem with ionizing radiation is that it can't be cleaned up or made to magically disappear; also, its effects are 100% detrimental to all life. In fact, there is nothing that we can compare the potential damage ionizing radiation can bring about to--once it is unleashed into any environment.
Biological agents, for example, can be contained and destroyed; even the harshest chemicals can, in theory, be cleaned up. Ionizing radiation as a pollutant, on the other hand, can produce a unique domino effect--i.e., contaminating any surface it comes in contact with--which may virtually be impossible to counter or repair, as the out-of-control-locomotive-like Fukushima global disaster is proving.
Because ionizing radiation pollution is so devastating and so virtually impossible to fix or undo, every human being has substantial reasons to fear it's potential harmfulness; sadly, this also applies to other sources of contact/contamination. Here are 10 points that support these concerns:
1. The dangers of ionizing radiation are often too easily and too quickly downplayed by the government, academia and private industries/associations. With very few exceptions, you will find that most of the for-sale "experts," shills & trolls working for universities, science organizations, the mainstream media (MSM) and government agencies see very little wrong with ionizing radiation. Not only do they seem to love ionizing radiation, but they, according to critics, often downplay the dangers thereof or suppress information that proves them wrong.
Such complete, unwavering agreement on the part of any group of people about such a controversial topic should, by itself, arouse suspicion.
Imagine how peaceful the world would be if similar consensus could be found in religion, world politics, human relations, or any other major human arena. The fact that it is rarely found elsewhere is reasonable grounds for skepticism--what's worse, there are many more reasons to be cynical:
- the fact that many scientists disagree with these pro-ionizing radiation, so-called "experts";
- the fact that cancer rates keep getting worse--most probably (among other already-identified factors) because of ever-increasing exposure to ionizing radiation;
- the fact that more serious accidents, with much more serious consequences than in the past, keep happening;
- the fact that nuclear power plants are at last being proven to be much more unsafe, vulnerable and dangerous than we have been previously told;
- and the fact that a practically-impossible-to-stop nuclear holocaust involving ionizing radiation will likely result in the end of all life on planet earth, etc.
2. Ionizing radiation-contaminated materials can't be cleaned up--not for thousands of years! We can try burning it (only to release radiation into the atmosphere), sending it off into space (only to risk it coming back to earth, possibly dispersing into an even worse mess) or burying it (only to have it corrode it's way out eventually!). This makes this type of pollution sort of "immortal"--from the perspective of human longevity.
3. It's the strongest and best-established way to inflict cancer on a human being. There is much about cancer that we still don't know. We're not even sure what causes cancer. But one thing we know is that ionizing radiation can induce cancer--in fact, given enough exposure and a high enough amount of ionizing radiation, cancer is almost a guaranteed result in most cases studied.
4. It's inescapably deadly in the right amounts and for exposures lasting for more than very limited amounts of time. Disaster crews working at Chernobyl (even though they wore heavy, very uncomfortable, lead-protected suits), for example, could only work on the site for a few minutes before having to be replaced with other workers. That's how intense the dangers of ionizing radiation can be to human beings.
By the way, there was no guarantee that these workers, in spite of the many precautions taken, would not eventually develop cancer or other related medical complications. The potential dangers are no less real for people who work with radioactive medical imaging equipment, in spite of the fact that the radiation they are exposed to is much lower than the ionizing radiation given off at military and nuclear power plant facilities.
5. We still don't know what other medical problems may be inflicted by ionizing radiation, beyond cancer and radiation poisoning. Some that come to mind may include: hair loss, sterilization, impotence, damage to the immune systems, autoimmune disorders, etc. Chances are that we haven't yet discovered or identified all the medical complications that may arise as a result of continuous and/or excessive exposure to ionizing radiation.
6. Ionizing radiation is a very effective sterilization weapon. Why do you think it is that you are (or should be) provided with a lead apron and/or thyroid shield when you get X-rayed? Ionizing radiation, though, can not only potentially lead to infertility but it can damage sperm (possibly leading to deformed fetuses if these deformed sperm mate with a healthy ovum) and, in the case of pregnant women, can also lead to deformed babies, developmental problems and even miscarriages.
For these reasons, neither men who want to father a healthy child someday nor pregnant women should be exposed to X-rays (without proper precautions), or to CT scans, for that matter. If a CT scan must be used, a healthy person's reproductive organs should be properly protected with lead-containing covers.
7. It can literally shut down all essential electrical power sources (through the EMP effect) in cities, countries and even continents if enough atomic bombs are detonated above targeted areas. Clearly, an all-out EMP attack on the best-developed countries in the world may bring us all back into the 1800s literally overnight. Most people don't realize how important electricity is to not only our convenience but for our survival but, for sure, an EMP holocaust would completely devastate the world for years.
8. It can inflict the highest, most lethal and most extensive form of destruction, if used as a weapon during military confrontations. If a nuclear holocaust is unleashed, much of the real estate in developed (and some developing countries) countries will become permanently unlivable. You can also wave goodbye to much of the technology that feeds, medically treats, educates, and entertains the world--including electrical power grids, satellites, desk & mobile communication devices, transportation systems, medical equipment, etc.
Will the people that survive such a holocaust be able to keep humans as a species going? More importantly, will the rampant ionizing radiation that will be unleashed allow any human beings (and animals, for that matter) to survive for very long after the holocaust? The nuclear winter that may be imposed after such a holocaust itself may destroy all life on the planet--or so some experts predict.
9. Even ionizing radiation's so-called "good" uses may not outweigh it's deficiencies and negative repercussions. For example, radiotherapy (the used of ionizing radiation to try to kill cancer cells) may kill more people, or may kill them more quickly, than cancer; in fact, critics question the wisdom of using a weapon that can as easily kill healthy cells as it can cancerous ones.
What's more, X-rays and CT scans can themselves trigger the malignant neoplasms (cancer) the medical community claims to want to diagnose as early as possible.
10. Ionizing radiation is an ever-increasing threat to all life on planet earth. First of all, the amount of radioactive waste that is being created yearly (by nuclear power plants, weapons research, military exercises, medical imaging, private laboratory experiments, extensive & almost-out-of-control greedy radioactive materials mining, natural processes, etc.) is monstrously large and ever-growing. It's fair to say, in fact, that since no one wants this stuff in their backyard, much illegal dumping of these "hot" pollutants has been taking place over the years.
Uranium mining, for example, is responsible for water aquifers (which would have otherwise preserved human life for years to come) literally being polluted beyond repair; the same may be said about the thousands of acres that have also been compromised unnecessarily and irreparably. And this doesn't cover the tons of radioactive materials that many governments (including the US) have been deliberately, unethically and illegally dumping for years into the world's oceans.
No wonder radiation levels have been increasing all over the world in the ground, in bodies of water and in the air! If this isn't stopped, as a matter of fact, such uncleanable pollution will be the cause of the cessation of life on planet earth. You are incredibly naive if you believe otherwise.
The bottom line is that ionizing radiation is more our enemy than our friend. If we lived in a world where people in positions of power could be trusted to do the right thing, then maybe you might label this article as sensationalistic or even merely suppositional. But the evidence at this point is simply too numerous and too overwhelming to ignore anymore.
Had ionizing radiation pollution been properly controlled or, at the very least, contained in specific areas, then maybe the news would not be as bad as it seems to be right now. Or if we could at least say that we had put a stop to the problem--maybe then we'd have a fighting chance.
For your part, do what you can to limit exposure to ionizing radiation. To that end, avoid X-rays and CT scans. Although the alternatives are more expensive and less likely to be approved by your medical insurance, insist on getting ultrasound and MRIs, neither of which exposes you to ionizing radiation.
Some people may say that your doctor should make those decisions but, lets face it, doctors' decisions today are as likely to be guided by legal fears/concerns, insurance company demands, government regulations/policies, and financial gain/loss as they are by medical considerations.
To summarize, some specific things you can do to protect yourself include:
- Keep close track of the ongoing Fukushima global disaster to see how it may affect your life and the lives of people you love;
- Limit how much seafood you eat; seafood is not only high in mercury and other dangerous chemicals/metals but it is also at least partly radioactive in many instances;
- Don't too-easily or too-eagerly give your consent to get an X-ray unless it's use is a "life or death" situation, there is no other safer medical imaging option available, you are provided with a lead apron to cover parts of your body that don't need to be exposed & the part of the body needing a diagnosis is hard tissue (e.g., bones, teeth, etc.) . . . if the body part needing diagnosis is soft tissue, insist on ultrasound or an MRI, if at all possible. As a general rule, an X-ray isn't as dangerous as a CT-scan but that is still no reason to underestimate its danger. Any source of ionizing radiation (including the supposedly "low dose" of an X-ray) is potentially destructive and should be avoided, if at all possible. Again, if an X-ray is the only option available, then you may have to give your consent but do remember that the more X-rays you have in your lifetime, the higher the risks of developing cancer; in other words, don't let anyone downplay the risks, ostensibly because they assume that you are too ignorant to know better.
- Strive to not consent to a CT scan unless it's the only medical imaging device available, a safer alternative (MRI or ultrasound) isn't available or isn't affordable for you, it's use is 100% necessary and/or the use thereof is a matter of life or death; at the very least, limit to a bare minimum the number of CT scans you are exposed to in your lifetime . . . remember that a CT scan can be the equivalent of 200 X-rays (approximately)--without question, that is a huge amount of ionizing radiation to be exposed to in one setting! If it's possible to get an ultrasound or MRI instead, insist on these much-safer choices--which, by the way, provide a quality of imaging that is either comparable or superior to the generally cheaper (which is why the insurance companies love them) and generally quicker (one of the reasons pressed-for-time medical personnel prefer them) CT scans.
- Don't depend on the highly-conflicted (because they all get funding/pay-offs from the nuclear power, uranium mining & medical imaging industries) mainstream media, universities, government agencies and "nuclear science" covens for information on the dangers of ionizing radiation. All these sources are inter-connected and, in most cases, provide only "glowing" (talk about irony!) reports on the dangers of ionizing radiation. Many of these people have jobs in or benefit directly from technology responsible for ionizing radiation exposure; can you really expect them to be objective and truthful under those circumstances? As for the MSM, it has mostly suppressed the truth about Fukushima. If they are both lying and suppressing info about this major disaster, how can you trust them to tell you the truth about any other disasters or facts relating to ionizing radiation?
- Keep a journal of all medical imaging tests (including dental exams) that the medical establishment imposes on you. Actually all patients should be required to do this from childhood and it is a very curious thing why neither doctors nor dentists push for this, even though it would clearly be in the best interest of everyone--except maybe to the extent that, if the public could see how much radiation they are being unnecessarily exposed to since childhood, they would be more proactive in insisting that alternative medical imaging (ultrasound, MRIs, medical thermography, etc.) be used instead of ionizing-radiation imaging. That would, of course, reduce profit margins for the X-ray/CT scan cartels and may even lead to some job losses--which, of course, supersedes (at least in these people's minds) anyone's health concerns and best interests.
- Don't take a plane ride if you can find an alternative way to travel.
- Buy and keep on hand a Geiger counter and/or dosimeters so that you can start testing your home (for radon gas), your water, your food and other things (like the air you breathe) you may suspect of being radioactive. Don't be surprised, for example, to find that much of the fruits and vegetables, meats and other foods that you are consuming right now has been irradiated. The ionizing radiation you may pick up on these foods may be, according to the same people who keep such practices mostly a secret (and if they were as sure as they sound that it's safe, they would be more up-front about the practice!), rather "minimal" but you can be assured that these people are downplaying both the amount of ionizing radiation involved, as well as the potential health consequences of using this highly experimental technology--a technology, by the way, which is defended mostly by highly-conflicted (in that they are often paid to say what they say or have a vested financial or career interest in this technology) so-called "experts."
- Educate yourself on the basics of ionizing radiation and what supplements, foods and medications can help modify or counter the effects of ionizing radiation.
- Move away ASAP if you live or work at or near a waste disposal site that accepts radioactive material, a manufacturer of ionizing-radiation-producing/containing products, any military facility that houses nuclear weapons of any kind, any military base/airport that uses X-ray structural cracks/faults diagnostic equipment (which, according to critics, sets off into the environment lots of ionizing radiation), laboratories that house radioactive materials, equipment & supplies, a nuclear power plant, etc.
While this is not a complete list of possible things you can do to protect yourself against ionizing radiation sources, it's a good start. The point is that there ARE things you can do protect yourself from, or to at least reduce your exposure to, ionizing radiation. Anyone that tells you that you shouldn't worry about ionizing radiation is either a liar or is paid to downplay/suppress the truth.
You're welcome to keep listening to these shameless sycophants and profit-motivated bottom feeders or you can, instead, at last wake up to the truth. The choice is yours! Make sure you exercise that choice, though, before you get cancer or suffer another serious consequence as a result of unnecessary and/or excessive ionizing radiation exposure.