…. Smith, that is. It’s Dick Smith’s 66th birthday and so this site wishes a happy birthday to Mr. Smith with hopes that there will be many many more.

Dick Smith, for those who don’t know, is an Australian businessman and aviator. He’s best known for Dick Smith Foods and Dick Smith Electronics. He’s also apparently quite confident, because not only does he put his face on everything, but he doesn’t seem to mind using the name “Dick” even-though it makes people giggle. Sure, he could call himself Rich Smith or even Rick Smith, but he’s Dick Smith and he had that name first!

So why am I wishing a happy birthday to an Australian businessman?   I’m not even Australian, after all.

It’s because Dick Smith went out of his way and beyond any call of duty to donate money to buy ad space and help in the fight against the AVN and the harm they cause to public health.

That is something that deserves more thanks than I can probably express. Dick Smith didn’t step forward and pony up the cash to help out because he had to or because he had a stake in it any more than anyone else. He’s not a pharmaceutical exec and not even a doctor. He did it because he didn’t like children dying of preventable disease and he wanted to do something about it and had the funds to do so.

For that I know that many of us in the anti-bad science movement and the skeptical activism community are eternally grateful. It’s helped as a big hit to one of the most prolific national anti-vaccine movements. I can only hope that the effort the Aussies have put into crushing this monstrous and dishonest group will be an inspiration to more around the world to fight against quackery and misinformation. In the internet age, these groups don’t do damage to just their own country, but can do damage worldwide. The successful efforts to root out the AVN have not only been a victory for Australia, but a victory for science, medicine and humanity.

No person of means is required to step up and contribute to this kind of effort, so when they do, they deserve gratitude for what is really a gift to the greater good.

Happy Birthday Dick Smith!

If there’s one thing this world really needs, it’s more Dicks!

Via Reuters:

US court rules again against vaccine-autism claims

WASHINGTON, March 12 (Reuters) – Vaccines that contain a mercury-based preservative called thimerosal cannot cause autism on their own, a special U.S. court ruled on Friday, dealing one more blow to parents seeking to blame vaccines for their children’s illness.

The special U.S. Court of Federal Claims ruled that vaccines could not have caused the autism of an Oregon boy, William Mead, ending his family’s quest for reimbursement.

“The Meads believe that thimerosal-containing vaccines caused William’s regressive autism. As explained below, the undersigned finds that the Meads have not presented a scientifically sound theory,” Special Master George Hastings, a former tax claims expert at the Department of Justice, wrote in his ruling.

In February 2009, the court ruled against three families who claimed vaccines caused their children’s autism, saying they had been “misled by physicians who are guilty, in my view, of gross medical misjudgment”.

The families sought payment under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, a no-fault system that has a $2.5 billion fund built up from a 75-cent-per-dose tax on vaccines.

Instead of judges, three “special masters” heard the three test cases representing thousands of other petitioners.

They asked whether a combination vaccine for measles, mumps and rubella, or MMR, plus a mercury-containing preservative called thimerosal, caused the children’s symptoms.

Well this is certainly good, if not expected news. While courts don’t always make the right decision on issues of health and science (witness the breast implant fiasco for example), in this case, the data is so compelling, so one-sided and the claims so baseless that it’s all but impossible to imagine any sane judge or jury would find for the anti-vaccine movement, which has so strongly backed this bunk idea.

Interestingly, the whole anti-vaccine movement also seems to be incapable of figuring out exactly what they’re complaining about. Is it the thimerosal containing vaccines? Is it the MMR vaccine? Is it all vaccines in general? All of thee? Such inability to even express a consistent and logical argument is very typical of such baseless claims.

Indeed, this is the fourth time a US federal court has ruled on the issue and the fourth time that a US federal court has completely dismissed the claims.

It should be noted that the court was specially created to deal with vaccine-related issues as part of The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. It’s possible that the litigants will appeal this decision and attempt to get a hearing at a higher US federal court, possibly even the Supreme Court. If the courts do consider their appeal (which they very well may not even bother hearing) then it’s hard to imagine a favorable ruling for the litigants.

(more…)

In recent times, medical imaging procedures that utilize x-rays have come under increased scrutiny as numerous media outlets and even peer-reviewed studies have reported that these procedures are putting patients at risk of cancer and causing tens of thousands of new cases of cancer per year, with many of those resulting in death.   These reports are leading to not only increased fear of medical imaging, but also to calls for policy changes and reduced use of x-ray medical imaging.

The CT scan has become on of the biggest targets.   CT scans are rapidly becoming one of the most common forms of medical imaging.  They’re relatively quick, painless and provide excellent diagnostic data for a wide number of conditions.   The technology of CT scanning and imaging processing has improved dramatically in recent years, making the procedures both more economical and increasing data quality and resolution.    There’s no doubt that these procedures save lives and improve the quality of life by giving doctors a look inside the human body at both bone and soft tissue.

CT scans do subject patients to some radiation exposure, however.   The levels of radiation which a patient receives from a CT scan (or even several of them) has never been shown to actually cause any long term harm, but the long-standing and many times debunked linear non-threshold model presumes that it will.  LNT was conceived as a “worst case scenario” for the effect that ionizing radiation might have on the human body in the earliest days of radiation research, when data was scarce.

LNT holds that radiation effect is directly proportional to dose, all the way down to zero and therefore assumes that the human body is incapable of repairing damage caused by radiation, recovering from radiation-induced cellular damage or in any way mitigating the effects of radiation.   It further assumes that the effect of a few atoms in a human cell being ionized is smaller, but otherwise no different than an enormous amount of ionization of the cells.

There’s no doubt that cancer risk is increased by radiation if the dose is high enough.   Radiation can damage the body on both a macroscopic and cellular level.   A high enough dose of radiation can cause tissue damage, internal bleeding and even death.  Those who do recover from multiple incidence of near-fatal acute radiation poisoning may face life-long complications and health issues relating to the damage caused by radiation.   At high enough levels, the dangers appear to be relatively linear in relation to radiation dose.  In other words, a person exposed to 1000 rems has approximately twice the risk of complications like cancer as someone exposed to 500.

By this logic, one rem should result in .1% the likelihood of developing cancer as 1000 rems.   This has been likened to observing that when a person is thrown off a ten story building they die 100% of the time, when thrown off of a 5 story building, they die 50% of the time and therefore assuming that 10% will die from a one story fall and 1% will die after falling 12 inches.  Furthermore, the implication is that the optimal living situation is zero radiation exposure (something which is effectively impossible) and the higher the exposure is over zero, the worse off you are for cancer risk.

Needless to say, many have pointed out that there’s a flaw in this logic and as knowledge of radiation has increased, LNT has begun to look less and less likely.  Unfortunately for the promoters of LNT, examination of the cancer rates in populations living in high radiation background areas shows no increase in cancer and in fact, has produced some evidence of a decreased risk of cancer.

Yet what these reports on the dangers of medical imaging really are is nothing more than a combination of the LNT hypothysis and fifth grade level mathematics.

In the media:
SF Gate: CT scan cancer warnings worry patients
WEB MD: Multiple CT Scans Raise Cancer Risk
Daily Mail: CAT scan cancer fear: Radiation ‘could trigger the disease in one in 80 patients’
US News and World Report: Too Many CT Scans Pose Cancer Risk, Studies Say
Wall Street Journal: Radiation Risks Prompt Push to Curb CT Scans

The math:
(more…)

Recently the magazine Popular Science ran a major story on individuals who believe they have electrosensitivity or electrohypersensitivity.   I’m sorry to say that it was an example of horrible reporting that really only talked about the issue as if it were proven real.   It stated the claims of the various individuals who claimed to have the condition without once considering that it might be “all in their head” and not real at all.   (I’m working on a post with a more definitive and full report on all the problems with the PopSci article.)

While it did contain some language about how long term harm, such as cancer, is not proven to be related to RF radiation, it reported about being “Allergic to radio Waves” is if it were conclusively proven as fact. Not surprisingly, the story has generated a lot of hype and has been championed by those who insist that the condition exists.

Well then, I’m going to make an offer.   I contend that electrohypersensitivity is not real.   The condition is psychosomatic.  RF fields do not produce nausea, headache, fainting, skin rashes or any other acute effect on the human body.   No person can, under controlled conditions, show that they manifest these symptoms more often around a low power rf transmitter than when away from radio sources.

Do you think I’m wrong?    Then prove it.   I’m willing to put up one grand of my own money to be proven wrong.   Honestly, I’m so confident about this, I’d put up more than that, but I want this to be a credible challenge and so I’ll put up an amount I know I can provide if I need to. I’m very serious and I’m willing to make the effort of setting up a test to conclusively and fairly settle the issue. And I will eat my words and fork over the money if you can prove me wrong!

The Challenge:

To prove that you manifest symptoms of electrohypersensitivity and that these symptoms are reliably linked to RF radiation by demonstrating the ability to detect the state of RF transmissions in a controlled enviornment.

The Reward:

1.   One thousand US Dollars, provided in the form of a certified check, money order or other mutually acceptable monetary instrument.

2.   I will admit I was wrong about electrosenstivity / electrohypersensitivity not existing.

3.  Your case will be brought to the attention of researchers, with whom I am in communication, and efforts will be made to report your condition and the verification in peer reviewed journals.

The Test Setup:

(more…)

Many countries in Europe like to talk about how “Green” they are and indeed in many of these countries the Green Party has become one of the most powerful political parties and has gained control of the government, either directly or as part of a coalition in the past decade.   But for all the talk of programs for renewable energy, reduced greenhouse emissions and better enviornmental policy, how have these countries actually been doing and how do they compare to the less “green” countries?

For the purposes of this comparison, a “green” energy policy is defined by the following:

• Rejects nuclear power, in the most extreme examples, calling for its complete phaseout or banning it outright.
• Strong focus on wind and/or solar power
• Favors enormous subsidies to wind and solar power
• Generally has a fairly favorable stand on natural gas, even if it is rarely (if ever) mentioned
• Attempts to reduce energy consumption through effeciency
• Believes it is acceptable to heavily tax or penalize energy usage as a means of encouraging reduced consumption
• Is supported by Greenpeace, the Green Party, Friends of the Earth, Earth First and other groups with similar agendas

The following numbers are from the US Energy Information Administration. Some of the data is a couple of years old, but if anyone knows of any other source of information that provides better country profiles with comprehensive data of this type, let me know.

Lets take a look..

(more…)

From a more hopeful time when most saw nuclear energy and nuclear technology as the amazing and hopeful field that it is, these ads ran in magazines in the 1950’s and early 1960’s.   They have a great positive and optimistic message combined with some inspiring symbolism and artwork.   My favorite are the Union Carbide ads, but others here include ads from Honeywell, General Dynamics, General Atomics, The Railroad Association of America, Inco Nickle, Lockheed, General Electric and others.   A few of these ads are not even for companies whose main activity was nuclear related, but noted that they were at least somewhat involved in the nuclear technology world.

I collected these classics from a number of sources.  A few came from the excellent Modern Mechanix blog, while others  came from Wikimedia, Erik Nitsche’s Flickr account and other websites.   Since these images were scanned from original material and posted to begin with, I’m assuming that there’s probably no copyright issue here, either because the original ad owner doesn’t mind them being distributed or because they’re no longer under copyright.   In any case, their use for documentary purposes should constitute fair use.

I really love these classics.

In the past few days, a great deal of information has been coming out regarding the explosion that occurred at the Kleen Energy power plant in Middletown CT.    Another worker has died from his injuries sustained during the blast, bringing the death toll to six.  The Chemical Safety Review Board has released information from their initial probe into the incident which contained some shocking revelations about the nature of the natural gas “purge” which was being conducted at the time of the explosion.

The “purge” is a fairly common procedure which has been long known to come with some significant dangers.  Simply put, the purge refers to part of the gas system being opened to the outside and gas released into the system to blow out the opening.   This is done when work has been done on the system, such as new pipes fitted or valves replaced.  In these cases, debris such as metal fragments may be left behind in the system.   These fragments could damage the turbines if they were not purged from the system.   Purging can be done with the natural gas supply or by using a blast of nitrogen, argon or compressed air.   In the case of compressed air, however, it may be required that another purge is conducted with gas or nitrogen before the final power-up, in order to assure there is no oxygen in the gas lines.    It is also possible to conduct such purges with the gas piped to a flare tower, rather than simply vented.   This burns off the excess gas, reducing the danger of an explosion.

There are safety regulations, but most of them are volentary and in the case of the Kleen Energy plant, there does not appear to be any specific violation of the law.   It had been previously recommended that purges be conducted with as few workers on site as possible and with the gas piped far away from the structure, but this was a recommendation and not binding.   In light of this accident, the Chemical Safety Review Board has urged a moratorium on purges using natural gas.

Natural gas is, of course, a potentially explosive substance.   When gas is isolated in a pipeline, it can’t explode, because there is no oxygen to allow combustion.   However, once released, the gas mixes with air, creating a potentially dangerous fuel-air explosive.  Natural gas can ignite at concentrations as low as 4%.   When it is vented, it is critical that the area be thoroughly ventilated to assure that the gas is completely dispersed.  Natural gas is primarily methane and therefore is lighter than air, although not as much so as hydrogen or helium.    In general, methane will tend to disperse upward, but this property can also be problematic if there is a roof or overhang, which the gas may become trapped under.

The rate of dispersal of methane depends on a number of factors.   Gas will disperse much faster in open spaces, and wind will help accelerate the dispersal.  Sheltered areas may contain the gas for some time, and while natural gas does tend to disperse upward, if compressed gas is discharged, the drop in temperature will cause an increase in the density of the gas.   Cold natural gas may linger near the ground until it warms up enough to be lighter than air.

A photo has come out of a purge conducted at the Kleen Energy plant only a few hours before the deadly explosion.   This purge was uneventful, but reportedly the purge which was conducted at the time of the explosion used the same setup.   The photo is quite telling, even shocking.

(more…)

Via the Edmonton Journal

Lancaster Wind Systems says by turning wind energy into hydraulic power, inert nitrogen gas can be compressed in thousands of kilometres of unused pipelines across North America — creating a sort of giant pressure tank.

Wind turbines would add pressure to the network, and small electricity-creating turbines tied into the system would draw off that pressure, producing power in a closed-loop system right where the electricity is needed.

“You might have 200 generators in a major city, each in the 1.5-megawatt to four-megawatt range. And since the nitrogen is returned to the pipeline, there are no emissions,” said Dave McConnell, president and CEO of Lancaster.

He thinks electricity transmission lines will one day be a memory, with the continent’s energy moving around as pressurized gas. The project has attracted funding from the Sustainable Development Technology Canada fund, and also raised millions from private investors.

With 18 patents already filed and more on the way, Lancaster has a working one-megawatt wind turbine producing hydraulic power, and plans to open a pilot project this summer in which 42 minutes of energy will be stored in a short pipeline section. A major pipeline company is supplying the material.

A wind turbine today is basically blades turning a shaft in a generator unit that creates electricity, with all the heavy equipment at the top of a strong mast.

Lancaster has turned that around. Its unit acts more like a windmill, with a lighter mast supporting the blades and hydraulic tubing, and the heavy equipment on the ground.

Currently the research focus is on details of transferring the energy to storage.

“That is where we are at, the mechanism of transferring this energy into a vessel. We can’t talk about it, except that when the fluid comes down it is under pressure,” said Arnie Barr, a field supervisor.

McConnell points out there is no hydraulic fluid in the storage system; it is simply moved into a tank and then sent back up the mast to be recompressed by the power of the wind.

“There is a pressure exchanger to convert the energy in the (hydraulic) fluid into the storage medium (nitrogen gas),” he said.

….

After a lifetime in the offshore-oil business, McConnell said he returned to Canada with the idea of buying a couple of drilling rigs. But then he had a better idea.

If this is a “Much better idea,” I’d hate to see a worse one!

Basically what we have here is a simple pneumatic power transmission system. One which is envisioned as being so enormous that the pipes and the pressure tank are actually one in the same. There are two things that make it a bit different than most conventional pneumatic systems: first, for some inexplicable reason it uses a combination of hydraulics and pneumatics, instead of just one or the other. Secondly, for other unexplained reasons, it uses nitrogen gas, rather than just using air, which is 80% nitrogen to begin with and works just as well.

(more…)

To build a nuclear weapon you need weapons grade fissile material.   This could be plutonium or uranium.  (It could theoretically also be something like neptunium or americium, but nobody has ever bothered with that, as it would be far more difficult.)   In the case of uranium, it must be highly enriched uranium and in the case of plutonium, it must be “weapons grade” plutonium.

The process of extracting plutonium from spent fuel for reprocessing, use in fast reactors or MOX fuel usage is similar to that used to extract plutonium for use in nuclear weapons.  For this reason, many nuclear energy opponents will scream “AH HA!” and say that a nuclear power reactor is clearly a “proliferation hazard” regardless of what type it is.  Furthermore, they’ll tell you that reprocessing is the ultimate danger and that if we dare recycling fuel, then others will recycle their fuel too (many already do, by the way) and if they do that then certainly they’ll be building weapons.

Of course, there are plenty of countries that reprocess fuel to one degree or another and don’t have nuclear weapons.   Germany, South Korea, Japan, Belgium and Italy either reprocess fuel or have done so in the past but never had a nuclear weapon.   Countries like Russia, France and the UK reprocess civilian reactor fuel but have never used this fuel to build a nuclear weapon.

There’s a good reason for this.   As it turns out, the spent fuel from a modern power reactor, such as a BWR or PWR reactor is completely unusable for a nuclear weapon.

Here is why:

(more…)

I hope this does not make me a conspiracy theorist, because on this one, I think the government is hiding something and I disagree with those who have dismissed this as a non-event.

On December 9 1965, a fireball streaked across North America and was sited in the Great Lakes region of both the United States and Canada.   There’s no doubt that this happened, as it was seen by many and produced sonic booms which were recorded on seismometers.   It was also seen in Pennsylvania, where some reports indicated that debris or meteorites may have started grass fires (there were grass fires, but whether or not this caused them is unproven.)

In the town of Kecksburg PA, local residents reported that an object landed (or crashed) in a small wooded area.   It has been pointed out that it’s not uncommon for observers of a meteor or other falling object, such as a satellite, to mistakenly believe that it has landed somewhere it has not due to an illusion which occurs when the object crosses over the horizon.  If there are trees or some other obstruction in the foreground, it can appear that the object has landed in the area behind the obstruction.   This phenomena is fairly common and it’s certainly possible that this is what occurred in Kecksburg, although there is some evidence to the contrary.

The Pennsylvania State Police were called and arrived to search the area, and the local volunteer fire department was also on the scene.   The State Police initially stated that they were turning over the site to the US Military, implying that there was something significant in the area and beyond their experience of jurisdiction.   However, later an official statement was released stating “The Pennsylvania State Police have made a thorough search of the woods. We are convinced that there is nothing whatsoever in the woods.”

At this point, the official documentation ends.   While there’s no doubt that something was reported and that there was an official report, any information about an object in the woods that night comes only from eyewitnesses – who are, of course, notoriously unreliable.   There are, however, a few pieces of indirect documentation to the event.   A Journalist from a local newspaper filed a report stating that an object had been found and the military had secured the area.   The reporter Bob Gatty, was at the site at the time and his story indicates that he had verified these events and seen them himself.   Despite these reports and the fact that the State Police had clearly stated that they did summon the military, the official line is that the US military never went to the location that night.

There is no doubt that many people in the area believed something did crash at the site on that night, although this does not mean anything did.

(more…)