Slashdot | Americans Favor Moratorium On New Nuclear Reactors

While a drop in public support for nuclear power would be expected after an incident like the Fukushima reactor crisis, the nuclear disaster in Japan has triggered a much stronger response among Americans. When Japan — the nation that President Obama held up as an example of safe nuclear power being used on a large-scale basis — is unable to effectively control its considerable downside, Americans are understandably leery about the same technology being used even more extensively in this nation. And safety concerns about the existing nuclear plants also deserve serious attention.

I was just waiting for a story like this to pop up…  I knew it’d happen before too long.  Americans are irrationally afraid of nuclear power at the best of times, and it doesn’t take much to throw them into a panic.  Now we’re talking about a straight-up moratorium…

Remember that image I posted a few days ago, showing various doses of radiation?  Notice how a coal burning power plant actually gives of more radiation than a nuclear power plant?  And then you’ve got all the extra pollution that a coal power plant spews out, that a nuclear power plant doesn’t…  But somehow coal is perceived as safer than nuclear.

Those reactors at Fukushima were commissioned in 1971.  They’re 40 years old.  They were hit with a huge earthquake and then a tsunami.  Granted, they’re leaking radiation and I wouldn’t want to live too close to there right now…  But they still haven’t failed catastrophically, and nobody has actually died as a direct result of those reactors yet.

Do you really think a pile of 40-year-old coal or oil power plants would’ve weathered this any better?  You don’t think there’d be any raging fires, or spilled fuel, or toxic clouds of pollution?

And we’re talking about power plants that have been up and running for 40 years.  New power plants are designed better, with more safety features.  You could expect them to be even safer than what’s in Fukushima right now.

But we’re talking about a moratorium…  Because radiation is scary…

Right now, today, the US gets about 20% of its power from nuclear reactors.  All of those reactors are old and overworked.  Many of them are operating beyond their original specifications…  Many of them were scheduled to be decommissioned, but they were kept on-line because there was no replacement available.  What are we going to do when we finally have to start shutting them down?  Where are we going to come up with 20% of our power if we aren’t going to use those nuclear power plants?

If we were at all serious about “energy independence” we’d be rolling out pebble bed reactors here in the US.  We could drop micro nuclear reactors into various rural locations rather than having to pipe power across the country, and our infrastructure would actually be more resilient to disasters and attacks.  And any spent fuel that was still radioactive enough to worry about could be fed into a breeder reactor and used to make useful fuel…  Until the only waste left wasn’t radioactive enough to worry about.

Instead, we keep giving lip service to “green energy” and things like that…  While powering our entire economy off of various fossil fuels – most of which are purchased from countries that really don’t like us much.  And all of which belch tons (literally) of pollution into the atmosphere, and will eventually run out.

But those very real threats are too distant and abstract…  Not like all that scary radiation heading for the west coast.

I don’t want to belittle or minimize the heroics of all the folks working to contain the nuclear disaster over in Japan. Nor am I claiming that there’s nothing to worry about and we ought to all be eating on uranium-dyed plates. But we here in the US have absolutely no perspective when it comes to nuclear radiation. All you have to do is suggest that some trace radioactivity might make its way to the US, and folks run out to buy potassium iodide by the bucketfull.

So…  Here’s some perspective, courtesy of XKCD:

Amazing what people will believe…

There’s a company out there called Power Balance.  They sell these rubber bracelets with a hologram embedded in them.  Nothing more than that.  They aren’t watches…  Nothing magnetic…  They aren’t doped with steroids or anything…  Just a chunk of rubber with a hologram in it.  Not much different from the plastic rings you can get from a vending machine for a few cents.

They sell these things for $30.  Or you can get the fancy silver ones or whatever.

But why would you want to buy a hunk of rubber with a hologram in it?  Because they’re magic!

I don’t really do a lot of testimonials, but this really works! I came across Power Balance when someone did the test on me. That night, while playing for the Phoenix Suns, there were about three of my teammates with the product on and we won that game by 57 points! I kept feeling something when I wore the bracelet, so I kept wearing it. When I took it off I went back to normal. I’ve been wearing the bracelet ever since. I want to do everything to get the slightest advantage; wristbands, necklaces, t-shirts, band-aids, everything and anything we can get our hands on. I’m here to tell you it works!

Yup, that’s right, the hologram makes you better at basketball.  But that’s not all!

It makes you better at paddleboard, and baseball, and hockey – amazing!

So, how does it work?

What Does It Do?
The Power Balance bracelet contains a Mylar hologram designed to react with the body’s natural energy flow.

How Does the Hologram Work?
Power Balance is based on the idea of optimizing the body’s natural energy flow, similar to concepts behind many Eastern philosophies.  The hologram in Power Balance is designed to respond to the natural energy field of the body.  The Mylar material at the core of Power Balance has been treated with energy waves at specific frequencies.  The resulting Mylar is believed to resonate and work with your body’s natural energy flow to help enable you to perform at the best of your ability.

Oh, wait, no it doesn’t…

In our advertising we stated that Power Balance wristbands improved your strength, balance and flexibility.We admit that there is no credible scientific evidence that supports our claims and therefore we engaged in misleading conduct in breach of s52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974.

If you feel you have been misled by our promotions, we wish to unreservedly apologise and offer a full refund.

To obtain a refund please visit our website www.powerbalance.com.au or contact us toll-free on 1800 733 436

This offer will be available until 30th June 2011. To be eligible for a refund, together with return postage, you will need to return a genuine Power Balance product along with proof of purchase (including credit card records, store barcodes and receipts) from an authorised reseller in Australia.

This Corrective Notice has been paid for by Power Balance Australia Pty Ltd and placed pursuant to an undertaking to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission given under section 87B of the Trade Practices Act, 1974.

Absolutely shocking!

Who’d have thought that a piece of mylar and a hunk of rubber would have absolutely no effect on your strength, balance, or flexibility.

SCIENCE!

I complained, a while back, about a fairly misleading high fructose corn syrup commercial I was seeing on TV.  There’s a new one.  I don’t know how long this commercial has been out there…  But I’ve recently started seeing a lot of it.  And it annoys me.

So…  Claim #1 is that high fructose corn syrup is “made from corn.”  This is true…  In as much as ethanol is made from corn, or gasoline is made from dinosaurs.

Yes, corn is used to make high fructose corn syrup.  So is lots of heavy machinery.  Saying that HFCS is “made from corn” makes it sound far more natural and healthy than it is.  It sounds like they just grind up some corn and throw it in your breakfast cereal, which couldn’t be farther from the truth.

Claim #2 is that it is “nutritionally the same as sugar.”  I suppose that depends on what nutrition they’re referring to…  It may have similar caloric content…  They may both count as carbohydrates…  But sugar and HFCS are not metabolized the same at all.

Claim #3, “it’s just fine in moderation,”  is where it all falls apart.  With regards to high fructose corn syrup, there is no such thing as moderation, as it is present in just about anything you don’t cook from scratch yourself.

Let’s take a look at these two teenage boys…  Starting off their day with a box of cereal.  Looks like some kind of flakes, and they’re readily admitting that it’s got corn syrup in it…  Maybe something like Raisin Bran Crunch.  Or maybe they don’t do cereal…  Maybe they have some Pop Tarts instead.

For lunch they’re almost guaranteed to have a soda of some kind.  It doesn’t much matter which one they pick…  Mountain Dew, Pepsi, Sprite, Coca-Cola…  They all have high fructose corn syrup in them.  Even if you grab something supposedly healthy out of the vending machine, like a Fruitopia, you’re still getting HFCS.

For dinner there might very well be another beverage containing HFCS…  But even if not, a pizza from Little Caesars will certainly deliver.  Or anything they can put ketchup on…

And we haven’t even pondered any snacks they  may have had throughout the day.  Twinkies, Oreos, and many other snack foods contain high fructose corn syrup.

Plus, I’ve just been looking for the words “high fructose corn syrup” in the ingredients…  I haven’t even started looking for any of the other names that HFCS goes by – like chicory, inulin, iso glucose, glucose-fructose syrup, or fruit fructose.

So, in a matter of about 15 minutes I’ve come up with common items for every single meal of the day, all of which contain high fructose corn syrup.

Obviously those are pretty much all pre-packaged foods…  And they’ll tell you that you shouldn’t be eating pre-packaged stuff all day long…  But the fact of the matter is that very few people eat home cooked meals these days.  Many people eat absolutely every meal either from a box or a restaurant.

So this commercial claims that HFCS is fine in moderation…  Yet it is downright hard to avoid eating HFCS unless you cook your own food.

Slashdot | How Norway Fought Staph Infections

Studies are showing that Norway’s dirtiest hospitals are actually cleaner than most other countries’, and the reason for this is that Norwegians stopped taking antibiotics. A number of factors like paid sick leave and now restrictions on advertising for drugs make Norway an anomaly when it comes to diseases like Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). A Norwegian doctor explains, ‘We don’t throw antibiotics at every person with a fever. We tell them to hang on, wait and see, and we give them a Tylenol to feel better.’ Norway is the most MRSA free country in the world. In a country like Japan, where 17,000 die from MRSA every year, ‘doctors overprescribe antibiotics because they are given financial incentives to push drugs on patients.’

Sounds good to me…

If you don’t over-prescribe antibiotics for folks who don’t need them, then you don’t have various bugs building up their resistance.

If you send people home when they’re sick, not only do you give them a chance to get well, but you keep them from spreading it around.

And if you get rid of drug advertising, you don’t have patients demanding that their doctors prescribe them some specific pill.

…too bad there’s no way in hell of this happening here in the US…

There’s no way the pharmaceutical companies would give up such a lucrative source of income.  Nor would paranoid Americans be willing to just go home and let nature take its course.  And you’d have a hard time getting paid sick leave from any employer here.

Slashdot | Scientists Postulate Extinct Hominid With 150 IQ

Neuroscientists Gary Lynch and Richard Granger have an interesting article in Discover Magazine about the Boskops, an extinct hominid that had big eyes, child-like faces, and forebrains roughly 50% larger than modern man indicating they may have had an average intelligence of around 150, making them geniuses among Homo sapiens. The combination of a large cranium and immature face would look decidedly unusual to modern eyes, but not entirely unfamiliar. Such faces peer out from the covers of countless science fiction books and are often attached to ‘alien abductors’ in movies. Naturalist Loren Eiseley wrote: ‘Back there in the past, ten thousand years ago. The man of the future, with the big brain, the small teeth. He lived in Africa. His brain was bigger than your brain.’ The history of evolutionary studies has been dogged by the almost irresistible idea that evolution leads to greater complexity, to animals that are more advanced than their predecessor, yet the existence of the Boskops argues otherwise — that humans with big brains, and perhaps great intelligence, occupied a substantial piece of southern Africa in the not very distant past, and that they eventually gave way to smaller-brained, possibly less advanced Homo sapiens — that is, ourselves. ‘With 30 percent larger brains than ours now, we can readily calculate that a population with a mean brain size of 1,750 cc would be expected to have an average IQ of 149,’ write Lynch and Granger. But why did they go extinct? ‘Maybe all that thoughtfulness was of no particular survival value in 10,000 BC. Lacking the external hard drive of a literate society, the Boskops were unable to exploit the vast potential locked up in their expanded cortex,’ write Lynch and Granger. ‘They were born just a few millennia too soon.’

Well, first, let’s ignore the whole “postulate” thing…  They don’t actually know how big these guys brains were, they’re just looking at the size of the cavity in the skull.  And they don’t know how smart they would have been, they’re just guessing from the size of their brains.  So it’s all pretty speculative.

And then there’s the question of whether Boskop Man is actually a separate genus…

The part that caught my eye was this:

The history of evolutionary studies has been dogged by the almost irresistible idea that evolution leads to greater complexity, to animals that are more advanced than their predecessor

Which is just plain wrong.

Evolution does not produce more advanced or complex animals…  It produces more fit animals.  Animals that are better adapted to survive in their current environment.