Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> they're infrequent and small

So far. Now you're introducing new technology. Are you comfortable prognosticating that it always will? Are there no lessons to be learned from previous tragedies, in particular, how _small_ radioactive sources are _way_ more dangerous due to peoples inability to identify them and tendency to pick them up?

You introduce medical radiation sources into a country without radiation controls and just a few years later you have an outbreak of tragedies. I'd rather not learn the lesson again the hard way.



> Are you comfortable prognosticating that it always will?

Much more than accepting the deadly status quo!

> Are there no lessons to be learned from previous tragedies

Sure there are. Never take any risks ever isn't one of them.

> how _small_ radioactive sources are _way_ more dangerous due to peoples inability to identify them and tendency to pick them up?

You're describing MRIs more than nuclear power plants, which also produce lots of small nuclear waste.


What's producing nuclear waste in MRIs?

This https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRI_contrast_agent ?


Maybe he's confusing it with PET scans or perhaps gamma ray imaging with technetium (used for cancer imaging).

Interestingly, the gadolinium in MRI contrast agents, while composed of stable isotopes, is a ferociously good thermal neutron absorber. The element is used in burnable absorbers in some reactors to keep reactivity level as the fuel is burned down.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: