The thing with looking at the danger of nuclear power is you have to make a more complicated comparison. It's not just nuclear power or "safe."

For fossil fuels you have to consider every:

* Oil spill, Oil Rig Fire, other fossil fuel related disasters (tanker truck fires, gas station fires, CO poisoning in houses, etc.) Recall for instance, in New Orleans during the flood the contents of refinery storage tanks were spread all over the city, and the Deep Water Horizons disaster that killed more people than Fukishima and caused fantastic amounts of ecological damage.

* The broad diffuse pollution of fossil fuel power stations and refineries (including particulates, global warming from C02, other heavy metals and nastiness released). This is released not only from power stations, but every tailpipe of the millions of cars in the world.

* The damage caused by getting fossil fuels out of the ground. Drilling, fracking, strip mining for coal, and the nastiness released from this.

* Wars. (ie. fossil fuels are running out, but we got enough fissile material to last a long, long time--not that there couldn't be wars over this too (lots of it is in unstable parts of Africa)).

In short, fossil fuels do a huge amount of damage, it's just not as acute and widely reported as when something goes wrong with nuclear, and doesn't carry the same, often irrational, fear that the media loves so much. For instance, some area of land infused with heavy metals is just as unlivable as an area of land infused with radioactive substances, but one we accept as normal pollution, and the other is worldwide, front page news.

The overall comparison is very complicated. My inclination is to think nuclear is better, but that's difficult because it involves mostly *potential* problems, not actual quantifiable problems as with fossil fuels. There will probably never be a good study comparing the two given how much irrational fear and corporate interest is involved.

Wind, solar, and geothermal are very nice and should always be part of the equation, but it's pretty well accepted that it can't actually come near to replacing fossil fuels or nuclear in terms of energy output at any cost.

>> ^Ariane:

Did Fukushima not teach you shills for the nuclear industry anything? Nuclear energy is far from clean or cheap. The cost of a nuclear power plant exceeds the cost of electricity it will produce which is why there has never been a privately financed nuclear plant EVER!


Yes, because wind and solar are ever so profitable aren't they. If you had a solar farm in Fukushima's place producing the same amount of power you'd have heavy metals seeping into the water supply across half of Japan. That doesn't even mention the fact that half of Japan, would have been permanently covered by those solar panels just to match the output of the Fukushima plant.

How many deaths are attributable to Fukushima by the way? Zero.

If you want to talk about long term health effects, please don't forget to add up the damage from burning thousands of tonnes of coal and dumping the smoke straight out into the air 24 hours a day 7 days a week. I know which poison I'd pick every single time.

" Hangin's too good for 'em! Burnin's too good for 'em! They should be chopped into tiny little pieces and buried alive! I'll kill him! STERRRRNNNNN! "
That pretty much sums up how I feel about this.
Reference for those who do not know Heavy Metal

Well.

I have several thoughts regarding this video:
1) Yes, the CGI could have been better, it detracts from the experience.
2) This is a thinly veiled commercial (as already pointed out)
3) The fact that this is a commercial makes it kind of silly to go the sci-fi route. If this were just a simple sci-fi short, I would let it slide, but seeing as this is trying to get a commercialized message across, I have to say the "science" behind the "fiction" ia a bit improbable. Frankly, I think unfair to make up dramatic stuff like this to get their point across; its misleading at best. (Note, I say this as a biochemist, and a person with both friends and relatives in big and small pharma)

All of that said, I enjoyed it. Cool concept, but NOT as a viral marketing campaign.
Also, as a former employee of a certain regulatory agency for some country, I can tell you that all generics are required to be just as safe and effective as their primo-name counterparts. The "danger" occurs when people are acquiring generics (or for that matter, counterfeit drugs from e-retailers) through atypical channels (as they mentioned in the video). HOWEVER; the likelihood that they could activate genes or pathways to cause mutations like this is implausible.

They'll just kill you because they're contaminated with heavy metal, or something.

http://videosift.com/video/AC-DC-Big-Balls-heavy-metal-humor

Learn something new every day!


>> ^Lann:

The song is ACDC's "Big Balls"
Anyway, poor guy...
>> ^bareboards2:
I found these lyrics to a song posted in the comment stream where I found this:

http://videosift.com/video/Hard-Ass-Blistering-Awesome-Heavy-Metal-Rock-Roll-m

ch cheese

Don't forget: Europe - The Final Countdown>> ^poolcleaner:

Let's see -- 1986 -- what did the metal gods deliver us in this year? Queensryche came out with a decent album, Candlemass released their very first album, Metallica's greatest work, Master of the Puppets came out; Iron Maiden had an alright album (not really in any of my top ten lists, but it's Maiden so it counts for something), Tony Iommi's solo album with Glenn Hughes of Deep Purple, Stryper's To Hell with the Devil (Haha, I kid), Dio's Intermission, Slayer's Reign in Blood, Fates Warning's Awaken the Guardian, Megadeth's Peace Sells But Who's Buying, and Judas Priest's Turbo.
It really isn't their fault that they're all so wasted, this year was a powder keg of pure metal madness!

Well, again, not exactly, since only last year supplies of homeopathic preparations (I can't call them "medicines", I just can't) originating in India were found to contain illegally high amounts of alcohol and heavy metals (http://tinyurl.com/3hcs9xo) and homeopathic pills marketed in the US to soothe teething babies were found to contain toxic quantities of belladonna (http://tinyurl.com/2cckjbd). Unlike real medicines, homeopathic preparations do not have to be vetted by the FDA before they go on sale. This is the reason why protest "mass overdoses" of homeopathic preparations like those seen in the 10:23 campaign in the UK last year (http://tinyurl.com/yj9v945) may not be all that wise - you just don't know what the homeoquacks have shoved into those bottles.

In any case, homeopaths don't give a shit about the possible side effects of their preparations - the manufacture of homeopathic preparations involves the dumping of huge amounts of homoepathically-activated waste solutions into the environment. If homeopathy really worked, this would be an industrial waste scandal that would put the oil wells of Nigeria in the shade. Fascinating article by Michael Edmonds on this subject at http://tinyurl.com/3msvpsk.
>> ^hpqp:

Hehe, of course. But the water/sugarpills homeopathic medicine itself shouldn't have any negative side effects...

>> ^BoneRemake:

Probably because the submitter is brand spanking new to the whole posting scene. @Shepppard
nochannel
Hiphop
Livemusic
Music


Yeah, the singer couldn't do it as good as a man...

But anyways, all jokes aside, I remember one woman who did "Paint It Black" on American idle...she did it like a rager, heavy metal thing... OMFG it blew... she had her one shot and blew it...

\m/_\m/
>> ^DerHasisttot:

>> ^schmawy:
promote

Thanks! :-)

>> ^schmawy:

promote


Thanks! :-)

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

It's a really divisive issue within the Green movement. Thought leaders like David Suzuki are definitely against it.


>> ^campionidelmondo:

>> ^dag:
Despite the recent accidents in Japan - I still believe in nuclear power. I've seen the graphs on heavy metal released from coal plants, rare elements required for solar panels and think it's still our best, greenest hope for energy in the future. This puts me at odds with many of my friends.

This is still a very liberal, very green opinion. It just so happens that the nuclear power industry tends to be politically conservative. Nuclear power is our best option right now, especially since we lack the technology to replace it with renewable energy. What many so-called anti-nuclear "green" people don't understand is that right now distancing ourselves from nuclear power will mean more dependence on dirty coal power.
One could say your stance on nuclear power is right for leftist reasons.

>> ^dag:

Despite the recent accidents in Japan - I still believe in nuclear power. I've seen the graphs on heavy metal released from coal plants, rare elements required for solar panels and think it's still our best, greenest hope for energy in the future. This puts me at odds with many of my friends.


This is still a very liberal, very green opinion. It just so happens that the nuclear power industry tends to be politically conservative. Nuclear power is our best option right now, especially since we lack the technology to replace it with renewable energy. What many so-called anti-nuclear "green" people don't understand is that right now distancing ourselves from nuclear power will mean more dependence on dirty coal power.

One could say your stance on nuclear power is right for leftist reasons.

>> ^westy:

Although i think using music to pacify kids and babies is a fantastic idea its probably not the best of ideas to play it at stupidly high volumes unless u want a deff baby.


WHAT? I CAN'T HEAR YOU!

Too much spirit!

Also, in before a heavy metal remix...