ScribbleLive

@Ian, this also is strange. Commonly, good journals insist that the authors do not discuss their findings in public before publication because the journals wish to publish original findings. For example with Nature you would forfeit the publication of your paper by talking about the findings to the press before they appear.

@Peter That was discussed at the start of the live discussion. The study has been accepted. So that is why it can be discussed. All is patented and copyrights are in place before this research study was released to the public.

@Peter Yes, the patent law would only play a role in medications, apparatuses, But may be attached to diagrams, and other presentable models.

@Majj On nuclear bomb tests, computer simulations are very accurate and a lot cheaper so I don't think any of the current nuclear countries will be spending a penny more on that front. The threat comes from non-nuclear wannabes, such as Iran and Northern Korea, for example.

@Edano I can see where you were heading earlier on. Well, the claim from the Mangano/Sherman article is that 14,000 plus infant deaths have already occurred and the title claims a direct link to Fukushima releases that have flown across the Pacific to US land. I back your overall idea but further research is required.

@Peter Good point, on the journals issue.

@MaryW Like Lilly has stated, because a lot of misinformation is running wild around the web it doesn't mean there isn't a health issue related to Fukushima. What we must bare in mind is that there are other agendas than the pro-nuclear or anti-nuclear ones. We must collect information and compare different sources. This article from Mangano and Sherman is tainted with scientific flaws and, if you care to read through the whole thing, is highly self-contradictory. This scribble panel, I'm confident, is quite a neutral ground. We have people who are pro-nuclear (or we used to have, I haven't seen them around for a long time), we have people who are anti-nuclear and we have people who are generally unbiased, and the result of this wealth of different viewpoints, expertises, etc. provides a very straightforward, substantiated and sound analysis of all the information we have access to. Disagreeing is as welcome as agreeing but we must keep an open mind. Please, don't feel upset or distraught whenever one of us goes against your viewpoint or tackles your fears. By collating viewpoints and information analysis the truth slowly surfaces. And unlike what some people believe, despite there being different sides to a story, there is only one truth. And this group has been doing an unbelievable job at unveiling it. =)

@MaryW True, there are copyright laws that protect such publications. Patents are a different thing.

@MaryW I might add, as a musician and composer I'm very aware of international copyright and authorship laws. It's part of my job (because I can't afford a lawyer to take care of that crap, pardon my French).

@Edano That's what I understood. Maybe I also got it wrong... it didn't make any sense to me anyway. And the same article is copy-pasted in all links that relate to that same article, give or take a few side comments. And it actually contradicts itself along the way.

@Peter, good point. The infamous Pons and Fleishman 'cold fusion' debacle was another case of science by press release.

@MaryW , book publishing agreements depend on the publisher. When I wanted to republish a figure in a book chapter I needed the permission of the publisher of the paper the figure was originally published in. You may wish to visit any major journal publisher like wiley, elsevier, springer or cell press and look at their authors' guidelines. In addition, you find instructions how to obtain permission from the PUBLISHER for the use of figures from articles published in a journal.

Economic problems

The energy source once billed as "too cheap to meter" has proven to be one of the most expensive energy sources in history.

Between 1956 and 2000, Canada's state-owned Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) received subsidies totaling $16.6 billion. Even with these subsidies, nuclear power is far more expensive than both fossil fuels and renewables.

The last 20 reactors built in the U.S. had an average cost of $5,000 per kilowatt of capacity; the last one built in Canada cost $4,000 per kilowatt. Compare these prices to the current prices for large-scale wind power and natural gas plants, currently at $1,200 and $1,000 per kilowatt respectively. www.davidsuzuki.org

Books in science are different from journal articles in that they are not peer-reviewed. This discussion reminds me that the only authors I know who are exempt from journal copyright transfer agreements in the U.S. are federal government employees because the U.S. owns the copyright and does not wish to transfer it to anybody. Somehow, the publishing companies cowed.

Fukushima to Canada: Nuclear power creates toxic pollution for 250,000 years
DATE: 19 DECEMBER 2011POSTED BY : BY DAVID SUZUKI But a closer look reveals nuclear power is neither an environmentally or financially viable option. Nuclear power creates radioactive waste for which there is no accepted method of safely managing or storing. It is also prohibitively expensive. The last plant constructed in Ontario, Darlington, was budgeted at $3.4 billion but ended up costing $15 billion when it was finally completed in the mid-1980s.
www.agoracosmopolitan.com

Make someone smile :) 2011/12/15

Smile Fukushima -- Merry Christmas Campaign
The local Fukushima newspaper Fukushima Minpo (http://www.minpo.jp//) announced on December 15 that it is collecting Christmas messages in Japan and abroad for children in the prefecture affected by the March 11, 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake. The "Smile Fukushima -- Merry Christmas" campaign launched on December 15 and will run until December 19. How to submit your message:
Send message by email to: smile@fukushima-minpo.co.jp

What to include with the message:
1) Nationality
2) full name
3) age
4) message (may be edited due to space restrictions)

Deadline:
Monday, December 19, 2011

WE STILL HAVE SOME A COUPLE OF HOURS LEFT TO DO THIS
tokyoanaba.blogspot.com

Goshi Hosono : “We understand that there is a difference between the cold shutdown state for a normal nuclear reactor and the state of cold shutdown that we have achieved at Fukushima Dai-Ichi,” Hosono told reporters in Tokyo. “The goal is to have nuclear fuel where it is kept in a cold state and to ensure that radioactive materials are not emitted. That is the whole point of the cooling system that we have in place.” Cooling system that we have in place ??? Shame and more shame Japan :-(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

Here is a copy of the Health Survey Questionnaire the residents of Fukushima are asked to fill out as a daily log or diary, conducted by theCitizens Health Care Research. Please note: this is a translation copy. translate.googleusercontent.com

A copy (also translated) of Fukushima Citizens Health Care Survey for Thyroid Testing details: translate.googleusercontent.com