Wednesday, June 20, 2012

Lynas:Skandal Pembohongan Paling Licik Terbongkar


Di Malaysia hari ini, sudah menjadi pengetahuan umum bahawa jika sesuatu perkara itu berkaitan dengan pembangkang, maka ia tidak boleh lari dari pembohongan.

Lynas, adalah salah satu pembohongan pembangkang tahap paling memalukan. Ini kerana angka matematik dan fakta saintifik tidak boleh ditipu. 

Fakta dan angka telah membuktikan bahawa Kilang Lynas adalah selamat. Fakta dan angka ini bukannya direka-reka cipta sepertimana Raja Petra Kamaruddin mereka-cipta kisah pembabitan Perdana Menteri dalam pembunuhan Altantuya dari imaginasinya. Ia juga bukan seperti Anwar Ibrahim berimaginasi menjadi Perdana Menteri pada 16 September. 

Fakta dan angka dari kajian saintifik lengkap yang dikemukakan oleh pihak International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) dan AELB mengenai Lynas bukannya imaginasi. Justeru, eloklah sekiranya Fuziah Salleh, Tian Chua, Tan Bun Teet (Pengerusi Save Malaysia Stop Lynas) berhenti menyalak dan menerima hakikat bahawa Lynas adalah selamat. Belajarlah merasa malu dan bersalah apabila berbohong. Apatah lagi apabila sekutu sendiri iaitu Che’ Rosli Che Mat, Ahli Parlimen PAS Hulu Langat yang juga seorang saintis, sendiri mengakui bahawa Lynas adalah selamat. 

Fuziah, Tian Chua, Bun Tee sebelum ini begitu galak menyebarkan pembohongan bahawa kerajaan cuba ‘mengecat-putihkan’ apa yang gelap mengenai Lynas. Mereka mengenepikan segala dapatan dari kajian yang dilakukan oleh pihak-pihak yang pakar mengenai radioaktif dan nuklear sebaliknya menampilkan pakar-pakar politik serta ‘pencinta alam’ yang sesetengahnya diimport dari Singapura untuk menguatkan hujah kononnya Lynas adalah merbahaya. 

Kerajaan bagaimanapun, tetap memberi ruang kepada mereka untuk membangkitkan isu ini sebagai usaha memastikan keputusan yang paling tepat untuk negara. Untuk itu, kerajaan telah menubuhkan panel parlimen untuk mengkaji apa yang dituduh oleh para penentang Lynas ini. 

Bagaimanapun, pihak yang menentang langsung tidak mampu bercakap dalam bentuk fakta dan angka tetapi semua hujah mereka adalah bersandarkan emosi yang berbekalkan air liur semata-mata. Justeru, panel akhirnya memutuskan bahawa “Jawatankuasa mengambil maklum bahawa melalui kajian, kadar purata dos sinaran di projek LAMP adalah 2 mSv setahun untuk pekerja (had dos tahunan dibenarkan adalah 20 mSv setahun) dan 0.002 mSv setahun untuk orang awam (had dos tahunan dibenarkan adalah 1 mSv setahun) dan ini menunjukkan bahawa kadar di projek LAMP adalah rendah dan selamat.” Dan, “Jawatankuasa berpuas hati bahawa projek LAMP telah memenuhi keperluan standard dan perundangan di Malaysia...

Malahan, terdapat peruntukan undang-undang dan standard yang dikenakan ke atas projek LAMP adalah lebih ketat berbanding standard antarabangsa. Jawatankuasa mengesyorkan agar lesen Kelas A (Mengilang – Peringkat Pengendalian Sementara) atau (Temporary Operating Licence – TOL) dikeluarkan... (dan) satu jawatankuasa pemantauan (monitoring committee) dibentuk bagi memantau secara berterusan operasi LAMP.” 

Jika Fuziah dan kuncu-kuncunya mampu berhujah dengan fakta yang meyakinkan tentulah keputusan panel akan berbeza sama sekali. Sifat pembangkang yang suka berbohong ini telah merugikan bukan sahaja Lynas, tetapi juga negara dan rakyat yang berpeluang bekerja di sana. Menurut Lynas, penangguhan dalam mendapatkan lesen untuk kilangnya, yang pada mulanya diluluskan pada bulan Januari, mungkin akan ada “akibat yang sangat serius” untuk tempahan bumi nadir bernilai RM80 bilion yang sudah diterima, kerana sudah ditempah untuk “10 tahun yang akan datang”. 

Ini bermakna kerugian juga dialami oleh negara ini selama 10 tahun akan datang kerana pendapatan kilang Lynas juga bermakna pendapatan kepada negara. Apatah lagi dengan nadir bumi menjadi antara sumber penting untuk menampung keperluan dunia yang semakin canggih ini. Oleh itu, kita melihat tindakan menghalang operasi Lynas, adalah umpama menolak rezeki. 

Nampaknya, dalam isu ini, yang merbahayakan rakyat, negara dan alam sekitar bukanlah Lynas, tetapi Fuziah Salleh dan kuncu-kuncunya. Terbukti radioaktif dari air liur dan hati mereka yang busuk mampu menjejaskan rakyat dan negara. 

Kita percaya, majoriti rakyat Malaysia mampu membezakan antara fakta dan angka dengan emosi dan air liur. Kedegilan pembangkang untuk terus memainkan isu Lynas dilihat sebagai bukti bahawa mereka amat terdesak kerana ketandusan isu di kala pilihanraya semakin hampir. 

Pembangkang nampaknya masih tidak sedar bahawa semakin degil sikap mereka untuk menolak Lynas, semakin kuat gelombang penolakan rakyat terhadap mereka. 

Tulisan sumbangan Beruang Biru

95 comments:

Anonymous said...

Kenapa projek lynas ni yang membangkang kaum cina je ye? pelik gak aku ni..kurang plak melayu yang membangkang..agak2 nya kalau kilang lynas ni pemilik dia cina ada tak kaum cina beramai2 buat demonstrasi mcm sekarang..?

salleh13 said...

sbb negara China adalah pengeluar produk nadir bumi ni terbesar dunia. jadi bila Malaysia juga berminat, negara berkenaan akan terjejas.

Anak Lenggong said...

“Radiasi yang dihasilkan ketika tidur bersama pasangan masing-masing adalah lebih tinggi berbanding radiasi yang dikeluarkan kilang Lynas (Advanced Materials Plant). Jadi soal radiasi ini tidak seharusnya menjadi isu di sebalik projek Lynas.

“Justeru, keputusan PSC (Jawatankuasa Pilihan Khas Parlimen) yang mengatakan kilang itu bukan loji nuklear dan mengesyorkan lesen pengendalian sementara (TOL) dikeluarkan bagi membolehkan kilang itu beroperasi dilihat satu keputusan yang tepat,” kata Pakar Radiologi, Datuk Dr Looi Hoong Wah.


Menurutnya, golongan anti-Lynas perlu berhenti menyebarkan perkara yang tidak benar, sebaliknya cuba mendapatkan penjelasan dan pendapat daripada individu yang lebih pakar dan arif dalam soal yang berkaitan dengan radiasi.


Looi berkata, langkah pencegahan yang diambil Lynas dalam menguruskan sisa buangan mereka yang didakwa bahaya oleh sesetengah pihak adalah jauh lebih cekap berbanding kilang lain dan beliau berani menyatakan Lynas adalah 99.9 peratus selamat.


“Kerajaan seharusnya perlu lebih berani dan tegas untuk menyatakan pendirian dan memberi penjelasan sebenar kepada masyarakat yang masih keliru dan kabur mengenai isu ini agar mereka tidak tenggelam dalam dakwaan palsu sesetengah pihak.


“Radiasi dikeluarkan Lynas sebenarnya jauh lebih rendah berbanding beberapa kilang sedia ada di negara ini dan ia langsung tidak membahayakan. Golongan anti-Lynas sepatutnya perlu menghentikan dakwaan palsu mereka,” katanya dalam satu sidang media yang dianjurkan Gabungan NGO Pahang Mendukung Agenda Untuk Nasional (Daun), di sini, semalam.

soulrhyme said...

jadilah pembangkang yang berhemah seperti dr rosli che mat.Beliau bercakap atas kapasiti kepakaran sebagai seorang saintis bukan main hentam keromo mcam kebanyakan ahli parlimen /dun pkr.Pembangkang sepatutnya menjadi check n balance yang bagus dan berkredibiliti.PKR the worst party ever formed in MALAYSIA

Anonymous said...

Siapa Fauziah, Tian Chua dan Bun Teet ? Siapa pula Dr Che' Rosli Che' Mat? Mereka berempat datang dari kem pembangkang. Walaupun 3 dari mereka 'menentang', tidak bermakna Dr Che' Rosli salah dalam isu Lynas ini.

Tindak tanduk penentang tidak lain dari pendekatan songsang kerana mereka tidak jujur dalam menerima fakta. Apa yang mereka lakukan adalah untuk kepentingan politik mereka yang juga songsang. Umum jelas bahawa politik pembangbangkang adalah pengamal 'politik songsang' kerana ketua umum mereka sendiri adalah manusia yang serba serbi songsang.

Mereka sudah hilang sifat malu. Berbohong adalah budaya hidup mereka. Yang jelas dalam isu Lynas majoriti rakyat di Kuantan khasnya dan di Malaysia amnya sedar bahawa pembangkang di Malaysia tidak mendatangkan kebaikan sebaliknya menjadi makhluk perosak yang bercita2 songsang.

mtk

Anonymous said...

itu semua pembangkang low class...campur pulak pembangkang racist...sebab tu dok meroyan tak habis2..

tengok dr che rosli, bukan sahaja pakar, tapi bangkang bertempat, sokong bertempat. itu baru pembangkang berkualiti. bukan mcm fuziah,tianchua dan bon tet tu..

Anonymous said...

YANG 99.9 % SELAMAT DEPA TAK NAK PERCAYA..NAK LAWAN...NAK BANGKANG..

YANG 99.9 % ORANG DALAM VIDEO DEPA PUN TAK NAK PERCAYA..TETAP SOKONG..TETAP NAK JADIKAN PEMIMPIN..

TAPI HUDUD YANG 0.01% TU YANG DEPA HEBOH SEPANJANG ZAMAN...TAPI SAMPAI HARI NI TAK BUAT JUGAK..

PELIK...PELIK..

Adi Kencana said...

Pakar nuklear PAS sendiri dah sokong, nak kata apa lagi?

NAK ALIH DARI ISU RAMPASAN PADANG PKNS & RM3 BILION ANWAR, NIK NAZMI BUKA ISU BASI ISTIJUARA. Baca di sini!!

http://apakecoh2.blogspot.com/

razifyahya said...

Salam,
Ramai org kata sebuah negara tu mesti ada pembangkang untuk mengimbangi setiap apa2 perkara pemerintah lakukan..check and balance kata sedap mat salleh..saya pun setuju perkara ni tapi kalo pembangkang dah jadi pembangang susahla mcm ni..tahun ni mengundi umno la aku..

razifyahya said...

Salam,
Ramai org kata sebuah negara tu mesti ada pembangkang untuk mengimbangi setiap apa2 perkara pemerintah lakukan..check and balance kata sedap mat salleh..saya pun setuju perkara ni tapi kalo pembangkang dah jadi pembangang susahla mcm ni..tahun ni mengundi umno la aku..

Anonymous said...

Memang Lynas berbahaya,
Mampu mengeluarkan radiasi yang tinggi di atas tanah di Gebeng, Pahang. Itu hakikat sebenar yg berfakta, faktanya seorang ustaz terkena radiasi Lynas dalam bilik hotel bersama bini orang di pahang baru2 ini. Siap lantik peguam lagi, nak lepas macam mat sabu la tu.

Tetapi, jika kilang Lynas dibina di Penang atau Selangor atau Kedah, tanah2 di sini anak menuteralkan radiasi tadi dan ianya selamat, mesra alam malah boleh di bina bilik di kilang tersebut untuk buat tempat memberi ceramah isteri-isteri orang yang muda serta cun melecun pada waktu malam atau 3 pagi.

Anonymous said...

mmg undi aku PANGKAH pd B.N pd PRU 13kali ini insyaALLAH..

Anonymous said...

"Pembangkang sepatutnya menjadi check n balance yang bagus dan berkredibiliti.PKR the worst party ever formed in MALAYSIA"

Saya sangat bersetuju dengan tulisan oleh anon 8:31 ini.

Anak Lenggong said...

Memang diakui didalam pemerintahan sesebuah negara, mesti diperlukan pembangkan supaya ianya menjadi check n balance. Sepatutnya sesuatu isu yang timbul itu dibincang secara berhemah dan mengambil ketetapan setelah perbincangan dilakukan. Lihat sahaja cara pembangkang diluar negara mereka bertekak untuk memajukan dan memertabatkan negara tetapi cara pembangkang dimalaysia..adalah hanya ingin merampas kuasa dan membuat perbagai krenah dah menabur fitnah serta mengajak rakyat memberontak..

Anonymous said...

no lynas it's mean no handphone, no HD TV and etc....

http://zoommalaysiaku.com/nadir-bumi

WTF lynas's opponent...

pak pandir 2020 said...

Silap, dia orang nak kilang tu di selangor atau penang sebenarnya. Kalau di pahang bn punta.

Anonymous said...

dengarlah kata pakar...kerajaan harus dengar suara majoriti dan bukan minoriti..

hwlooi said...

Holding Pure Metallic Thorium-232 in the Hand

IF you go to Google and do a search for pictures of how foreign scientists handle Thorium-232 and even pure enriched Uranium-235 and 238, you would be able to find a lot of pictures that clearly show that you can safely hold pure thorium of uranium pellets or rods in your hands.

This is because Thorium-232, when it decays, produces only alpha particles and no gamma rays.

Because of the very long half life of Thorium-232, which is 14 billion years (the age of the universe is only 13.7 billion years), the amount of Thorium-232 which is transformed to Radium-228 after, say a year, is incredibly small.

As such, only a tiny amount of alpha radiation (helium atoms without their electrons) is produced by the thorium atoms.

Alpha particles do not penetrate the human skin and are, therefore, not dangerous.

Thorium-232 is safe, provided we are not stupid enough to eat it or grind it up into a fine powder and inhale it.

Even if you were to consume the non-radioactive Lead-208, you would not be staying healthy for long.

Thorium-232 does not produce the dangerous penetrating ionizing gamma rays.
The 0.09 MeV of gamma radiation detected comes from Thorium-228's decay to Radium-224 to Radon-220 to Polonium-216 and ultimately through a number of pathways to the stable non-radioactive Lead-208.

That is why I really cannot understand why people in Kuantan are so irrationally fearful of Lynas Corporation's rare earth plant, which will produce only a small amount of Thorium-232 in their waste product.

That plant is neither a nuclear reactor nor a nuclear bomb manufacturing facility.

It is only a plant to extract rare earth from its ore, which is dug up from the ground.

And the rare earth ore has been in the ground for billions of years.

The situation has become ridiculous, and even farcical.

For instance, one of my friends has even stopped construction of his new house in Kuantan because he is fearful of a nuclear explosion in the Lynas plant.

This impossibility has become a probability in the minds of the intensely brainwashed people in Kuantan.

REMEMBER THE "WHITE GAS BULBS" OR RATHER KEROSENE GAS MANTLES MADE IN GERMANY?

THESE WERE USED IN THOSE LANTERNS WHICH GIVE OFF A VERY BRIGHT WHITE LIGHT AND WERE UNIVERSALLY USED BY ALL STREET HAWKERS IN THE WHOLE OF MALAYSIA IN THE 60s AND 70s?

THESE GAS MANTLES ARE MADE OF FABRIC SOAKED IN THORIUM-232 MIXED WITH A LITTLE CERIUM. AND AFTER THE INITIAL "FIRING" IT BECOMES ALMOST PURE THORIUM DIOXIDE.

IN THE BURNING KEROSENE VAPOUR, THE TEMPERATURE CAN REACH OVER 1,000 DEGREES CENTIGRADE.

MILLIONS OF MALAYSIANS IN THE PAST HAD HELD THESE "DANGEROUS, RADIOACTIVE" THORIUM GAS MANTLES IN THEIR HANDS.

THESE ARE STILL BEING SOLD FREELY AND WITHOUT ANY SPECIAL LICENSE FROM AELB.

REMEMBER THORIUM DIOXIDE HAS A SPECIFIC ACTIVITY OF 3,585 Bq/g ! THE "WASTE" FROM LYNAS IS ONLY 6 Bq/g.

WHY ARE FOLKS FROM THE ANTI-LYNAS CAMP SO FRIGHTEN OF 6 Bq/g FROM LYNAS WASTE WHILE NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE 3,585 Bq/g OF RADIATION FROM THEIR KEROSENE LAMP ?


Dr Looi
*
http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242

hwlooi said...

IS THE LYNAS PLANT DANGEROUS?


LYNAS PLANT: No evidence it's harmful
By Datuk Dr Looi Hoong Wah, Kuantan, Pahang



IT is painful to see so many well-educated Malaysians, including doctors, medical specialists and professors, being misled by irresponsible people.
Even the president of the Consumers Association of Penang thought that since thorium-232 has a long half-life (14 billion years), it is extremely dangerous when the reverse is true.
Here are some facts with regard to the Lynas controversy:
THE potassium tablets for high blood pressure is highly radioactive, with a radioactivity of 32 Bq/g and we need about 2g to 3g of potassium daily to stay alive. (Bq is the number of atoms decaying in one second.)
The radioactivity comes from potassium-40. This is more than 500 per cent the radioactivity of the Lynas waste which contains only 6 Bq/g mainly from thorium-232.
Potassium when taken stays in the intracellular space where the cancer-sensitive chromosomes are located, whereas the ingested or inhaled thorium-232 remains in the extracellular (outside the cell) space.
All the potassium that we consume daily in our food contains potassium-40 and the normal dietary potassium would give a total of about 80 Bq/g per day.
THE so-called sodium-free salt recommended by health experts to combat high blood pressure is nothing more than highly radioactive potassium salt.
Thorium-232 decay produces only alpha particles, which can be stopped by a piece of thin paper and cannot penetrate even the outer layer of the human skin, whereas potassium-40 in our diet produces dangerous gamma and beta rays from all the three types of beta decay, that is, electron emission, electron capture and positron emission.
A typical 5.5 MeV alpha particle can be expected to travel less than 0.005cm in body fluids.
THE longer the half-life of a substance, the less its radioactivity and as such, the less dangerous it is.(

As a simple analogy, if it takes 14 billion years for half of a house to be burnt, there is no chance of anybody getting hurt. But if it takes only 14 minutes for half of the house to be burnt down, many will be injured or killed.
Thorium-232, which is found in the Lynas waste, has an incredibly long half-life of 14 billion years and as such is much less radioactive than the potassium-40 whose half-life is only 1.25 billion years.
IT has been estimated that in the worst-case scenario, the radiation risk from the Lynas plant is only 0.002 mSv/yr.
In Ramsar, Iran, the naturally occurring radiation is extremely high at 260 mSv/yr. This is 13,000,000 per cent higher than the expected worse-case scenario in Kuantan.
And the people in Ramsar have been found to be healthier and live longer than the rest of the Iranians.
There is also no increase in the number of cancer cases.
In the southwestern area of Kerala state in India, the thorium-232 in the soil is as high as 4,000 parts per million as compared with the Lynas waste, which has only 1,650 parts per million.
And studies have shown that the population which has been living all their lives in these areas do not have a higher incidence of cancer and their blood and tissues do not have a significant increase in the level of thorium.
cont.

hwlooi said...

cont.
We are exposed to radiation all our lives. In fact, we get 4,400 Bq of radiation from the potassium-40 with a further 3,000 Bq from carbon-14, which forms part of our body tissues.
There is no way we can escape completely from radiation. Even outer space is full of radiation.
Another fear is the inhalation of thorium dust.
We must remember that thorium-232 is heavier than the so-called non-radioactive lead-208 (actually lead-208 does decay, but since it has an even longer half-life of 19 million billion years, the radioactivity is insignificant).
Because of its mass, thorium-232 particles are heavy and it has great difficulty getting airborne.
Normally, these particles get airborne only when they are tiny and the only ones that can get deep into the lungs are those which are about 1 micron in diameter.
These fine particles are only found in the mines and experimental nuclear plants where powerful machines are used or where there is combustion.
The chance of inhaling 1 micron sized thorium particles in the Kuantan air is practically non-existent.
I have not seen or heard or found in the scientific literature of any case of proven lung disease, death or, for that matter, any disease in humans caused by ingestion or inhalation of thorium-232.
Thorium-232, by inhalation or ingestion, has not been proven to have caused a single human death.


Read more: LYNAS PLANT: No evidence it's harmful - Letters to the Editor - New Straits Times http://www.nst.com.my/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/lynas-plant-no-evidence-it-s-harmful-1.61339#ixzz1tVIxlYpN

hwlooi said...

What Benefit Do Malaysia Get From The Lynas Plant?


Even a primary school child should know that the construction of a multi-billion dollar industrial plant would bring enormous financial benefits to the local community as well as to the country.

Construction of the plant had provided a substantial boost to suppliers of commodities like concrete and steel and manufacturers of hundreds of other components. For example, the plant had used thousands of cubic metres of concrete—as well as
• Thousands of tons of steel and miles of piping
• Hundreds of miles of electric wiring and hundreds of electrical components and all these are supplied by our local contractors.
The construction of the plant itself would had added hundreds of millions to the gross domestic product.

Each year, the plant will generate billions in sales of the rare earth (economic output) and millions more in total labour income. These figures include both direct and secondary effects. The direct effects reflect the plant’s expenditures for goods, services and labour. The secondary effects include subsequent spending attributable to the presence of the plant and its employees as plant expenditures filter through the local economy (e.g., restaurants and shops buying goods and hiring employees).


And the subsequent production of the plant is expected to be in the billions of ringgit and this is considered to be part of the country's gross domestic product (GDP). Billions more would be added to the GDP as a result of the spin-off effect.

And when our GDP is increased by the billions, the government will be allowed to print more billions of ringgit (CREATING MONEY OUT OF THIN AIR ) to pay for the schools, hospitals, subsidies and scholarships etc for the people, without any devaluation of our ringgit by the foreigners.

Key Facts
• Each year, the plant will generate millions to billions of ringgit as a spin-off effect in sales of goods and services in the local community and millions more in total labour income.
• Operation of the plant creates more than 350 highly paid permanent jobs. These jobs pay much more than those working the super markets or places like Kentucky Fried Chicken.
• The permanent jobs at the plant create an equivalent number of additional jobs in the local area to provide the goods and services necessary to support the plant work force (e.g., grocery stores, dry cleaners, car dealers). Even the sex workers in Kuantan would benefit!
• Construction of the new plant had created up to thousands of jobs at peak construction.

• Local contractors had benefited enormously from the construction of the plant, in terms of hundreds of millions of ringgit

• The yearly production of billions of ringgit of rare earth will add billions to our GDP and produce billions in export earnings (even though the money belongs to Lynas share holders, the national statistics will show up as our own in terms of GDP growth and export growth).

The economic job multiplier effect of any industrial plant is 4 to 5. So although the Lynas plant gives direct employment to 350 high paying jobs to the Kampong folks, the actual number of jobs created is more in the region of 1,750 !


cont.

hwlooi said...

cont.

Why do we have to give Lynas the 12 yrs tax free incentive?


Quote Optiplex330:

"Giving tax break is very common to entice people to set up business. If you are an Indian or Chinese your forebear coming from India or China know that very well. They were enticed to come to Malaysia to open up the country, and land were practically given free. Old people told me their land rental is a single pepper corn. Those who don't know about tax break know zero about businesses. Having said that, I think the maximum is 10 yrs so Lynas is unusual in that it is given 12 years.

A classic example: Businesses have to give Bumi 30% share but when Intel came to Penang, they were allowed SPECIAL treatment and don't have to give a single share to Bumi (may be this explain the extra 2 yrs tax break?). Why? This is because the government badly wanted Intel because when they come, they will bring along an entire electronic industry to Malaysia. So while government do not directly benefited from Intel, the follow on industry created by Intel greatly benefited Malaysia.

And also for this reason, those who think Lynas produces only about 300 jobs and no tax revenue for Malaysia are just being short sighted. They don't know that because of Lynas, a Green Technology industry could be born and Siemens is the 1st to announce coming precisely because of Lynas. But because of Anti-Lynas, Siemens may pull out so there go more jobs and tax revenue for Malaysia."

In Other Words, The Plant WILL Boost Local and Country's Economy.
The Lynas plant WILL provide substantial economic benefits during the decades of operation. The jobs, employee's taxes, and direct and secondary spending WILL strengthen the economy.

SO DO NOT ASK THE NON-PHYSICAL and RATHER CHILDISH QUESTION OF WHAT BENEFIT DO MALAYSIA GET FROM THE LYNAS PLANT!

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK) MRCP(London)

*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242


http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/16/rare-earth-a-richer-malaysia-and-a-greener-world/#comment-76493

hwlooi said...

If it is so good, why is it that no other country wants these plants built?


IF IT IS SO SAFE, WHY IS IT THAT NO OTHER COUNTRY WANTS THESE PLANTS BUILT?

Not true. A number of other countries have built or are building these rare earth plants.

New Rare Earth Plants and Mines

1. Arafura in Whayalla Australia
2. Great Western Minerals in Steenkampskraal South Afrika
3. Avalon Rare Metal in Thor Lake Canada
4. Alkane in Dubbo New South Wales Australia
5. Molycorp Inc. in Mountain Pass, California, USA
6. Tasman in Sweden
7. Greenland Minerals and Energy in Greenland
8. Canada Rare Earth in Canada
9. 50 yr Old La Roche Plant in France



In the past the rare earth plants in America were closed for the same reason why any mine or company close down...it had become uneconomical i.e. losing money!

This was because at that time China was selling rare earth elements at a ridiculously low price and nobody could compete with them.

Feb 22, 2012 :
Molycorp Inc. said it will start up a newly constructed rare earths processing plant at its Mountain Pass, Calif., operation this week.
Crushing and cracking operations as well as the facility’s combined heat and power plant are scheduled to come online this week, while other components—including milling and mineral extraction, rare earth oxide...

Australians building Giant Rare Earth Plant in Australia:

It should also be noted that Australians are delighted that a company called Arafura is building a huge Rare Earth Processing Plant costing over A$1 Billion in Whyalla in South Australia.

This plant is expected to produce over 1,000 high paying jobs for the Australians.

Arafura must be hoping that we are stupid enough to stop Lynas and stop competing with them.

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah.
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London).
*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242


http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/16/rare-earth-a-richer-malaysia-and-a-greener-world/#comment-76493

hwlooi said...

Why do you say that Radiation from the Lynas plant is not significant?


HERE ARE SOME INFORMATION ON THORIUM-232


Thoriun-232 is the only weakly radioactive element found in the Lynas waste product.

Thorium-232 decay produces only alpha particles which can be stopped by a piece of thin paper and cannot penetrate even the outer layer of the human skin, whereas potassium-40 in our normal diet produces the highly dangerous gamma and beta rays from all the 3 types of beta decay, i.e. electron emission, electron capture and positron emission.

A typical 5.5 MeV alpha particle can be expected to travel less than 0.005 cm in body fluids.

THE LONGER THE HALF-LIFE OF A SUBSTANCE THE LESS IS THE RADIOACTIVITY and as such the less dangerous it is.

As a simple analogy, if it takes 14,000,000,000 years for half of a house to be burnt, there is no chance of anybody getting hurt. But if it takes only 14 minutes for half of the house to be burnt down, a lot of people will be injured or killed.

Thorium-232 which is the only significant radioactive element found in the Lynas waste has an incredibly long half-life of 14 billion years and as such is much less radioactive than the Potassium-40 whose half-life is only 1.25 billion years.

COMPARISON OF RADIOACTIVITY IN Bq (Specific activity.. number of atoms decaying in 1second)

Pure Thorium-232 = 4,080 Bq/gm

Pure Potassium-40 = 254,000 Bq/gm

Naturally Occurring Potassium (3 different isotopes) in our body and food = 31.825 Bq/gm

Artificially created Plutonium-238 = 634,000,000,000 Bq/gm (1/2 life=87.7 years)

Monazite ore from Amang or Tin Tailings in Malaysia = 284 Bq/gm

Lynas Rare Earth Waste = 6 Bq/gm

It has been estimated that in the worst case scenario, the radiation risk from the Lynas plant is only 0.002 mSv/yr.
In Ramsar, Iran, the naturally occurring radiation
is extremely high at 260 mSv/yr. This is 13,000,000%higher than the expected worse case scenario in Kuantan.

And the people in Ramsar, Iran has been found to be healthier and live longer than the rest of the Iranians! There is also no increase in the number of cancer cases.

In the south western area of Kerala state in India, the Thorium-232 in the soil is as high as 4,000 parts per million as compared to the Lynas waste which has only 1,650 parts per million.

And studies have shown that the population which have been living all their lives in these areas, do not have a higher incidence of cancer and their blood and tissues do not have a significant increase in the level of Thorium.

We are exposed to radiation all our lives. In fact we get 4,400 Bq of radiation from the Potassium-40 with a further 3,000 Bq from Carbon-14 which forms part of our body tissues.

There is no way we can escape completely from radiation. Even outer space is full of radiation. The only way we can escape from all radiation is to leave this universe! or jump into the Kuantan River and be eaten by the crocodiles.

Come to think about it, this would not work either as human body as well as the crocodile's body have their own intrinsic radioactivity!

cont.

hwlooi said...

Thorium-232 In Clay Soil Cannot Get Into Body Tissues

1. Ingestion

Thorium-232 is strongly bound (adsorbed) by soil especially clay soil. The Thorium concentration in the clay particles is about 500,000 % higher than in the water between the clay particles.

So, it cannot be leached out by water and pollute the rivers. Even if the clay soil is washed into the rivers and sea it will not do any harm as the thorium will still be strongly attached (adsorbed) to the clay and will not dissolve into the water.

When ingested there is insignificant absorption of the Thorium because of this strong bond between the clay particles and the Thorium. Practically all the Thorium will be excreted in the faeces with the clay.

Even when Thorium-232 is in the gut, it cannot do any significant harm as a typical 5.5 MeV alpha particle can be expected to travel less than 0.005 cm in body fluids, or much less in the semi-solid faeces.

That may be why, there is not a single well documented case of accidentally or environmentally ingested or inhaled Thorium-232 induced cancer in the intestines.

2. Inhalation

Because of its mass, Thorium-232 particles are very heavy and has great difficulty to get airborne.

Normally these particles get airborne only when they are very small and the only ones that can get deep into the lungs are those which are about 1 to 2 micron in diameter.

These fine particles are only found in the mines and experimental nuclear plants where powerful machines are used or where there is combustion. The chance of inhaling1 to 2 micron sized thorium particles in the Kuantan air is practically non-existent.

All lung disorders are associated with prolonged exposure in the mines or Thorium refining plants where the above conditions are present.

Thorium-232 produces only alpha rays (gamma rays from daughter isotopes are insignificant) which cannot pass through even a thin piece of paper or the surface of the skin.

If you have a lump of pure Thorium-232, all you need to do is to wrap it up in newspaper and that will stop all the alpha radiation from getting out!

Since alpha radiation cannot go far, even if you have a huge pile of Lynas waste, the external radiation would not increase by much because only the tiny percentage of thorium-232 atoms directly on the surface of the pile will be able to radiate out their alpha particles. Those just below the surface will remain inside the pile and be converted to simple helium gas.

The radiation of 6 Bq/gm from the weakly radioactive Thorium-232 in the Lynas waste is so low that even IAEA do not consider it significant and as such can be transported without any special permission.

Moreover, Thorium-232 is not a Carcinogen (cancer causing agent) if Inhaled or Ingested according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer IARC.

Thorium-232 is considered to be a carcinogen only IF ADMINISTERED INTRAVENOUSLY AS A COLLOIDAL DISPERSION OF THORIUM-232 DIOXIDE.


It was claimed that a 20 year study in one of the largest rare earth mine, the Bayun Obo mine has shown that inhalation Thorium has proven to cause lung cancer. The number of miners in 2001 were 6,983 of which 3016 were exposed to dense dust in the mine.

After correcting for the heavy smoking, there was an excess of 10 cases of lung cancer in workers who had worked for about 30 years or so in the mine.

But this study cannot exclude crystalline silica (SiO2) in the dust as being the cause of the lung cancers. Silica is a confirmed carcinogen while Thorium by inhalation or ingestion is not.

cont.

hwlooi said...

cont.

AND MOREOVER, KUANTAN PEOPLE ARE NOT RARE EARTH OR THORIUM MINERS!

The rare earth miners in the case of the Lynas Rare Earth Plant are still in a place called Mount Weld in Western Australia!

If there is any long term lung problem, the Australians are the ones who will be getting those problems and not the Kuantan people.

Kuantan people are just ordinary traders, office workers, taxi drivers or just hanging around doing nothing in the air-conditioned malls.

It is tantamount to claiming that since workers in the granite quarries and underground tin mines developed severe lung disease (silicosis) and lung cancer from inhaling dust containing silica (sand), the millions of tons of sand in our beaches should be relocated to somewhere safe or shipped back to...?Australia.

Definite evidence that crystalline silica (Sand, Sio2) is associated with an increased rate of lung cancer led the International Agency for Research on
Cancer (IARC) to conclude in 1997 that crystalline silica is a known human
carcinogen.

There is also a fear that the waste will be dumped all over the place. Unfortunately, this risk also apply to all our factories and plants. Should we demand that all our factories and plants to be closed down so that we can go back to the good old days of tapping rubber and plucking coconuts for the BIG WHITE MAN?

And what about other pollution and/or radiation sources in the environment before Lynas even starts. For example, a 1,000MW coal plant after just 1 year of operation produces 6,000,000 tons of CO2, 44,000 tons of SO2, 22,000 tons of NO2, 320,000 tons of ash containing 400 tons of heavy metals (arsenic, mercury, cadmium, lead etc.) and, here’s the kicker, including 5 tons of Uranium and 12 tons of Thorium from which the radon gas of both decay chains are out the chimney and into our air... and we are building TWO of these now to add to those we already have on the peninsula.


3. External Threat

Thorium-232 produces only alpha rays (gamma rays from daughter isotopes are insignificant) which cannot pass through even a thin piece of paper or the surface of the skin.

Even a giant lump of Thorium-232 containing material will radiate alpha particles only from the tiny amount of Thorium-232 atoms on it's surface as all the alpha particles produced by those inside the lump cannot penetrate even a couple of centimetres, so even if we have a small mountain of material containing Thorium-232, it makes not much difference
.
A simple newspaper wrapping would stop all alpha radiation from a lump of Thorium-232.

Someone claimed that although Thorium-232 may not be dangerous, all their "daughter" isotopes have very short half-lives like Radon-220 and these are highly radioactive, so how could we say that Thorium-232 is not dangerous.

Well, the reason is obvious. But I find great difficulty in explaining to the layman the reason why when an element with an extremely long half-life that decays into isotopes with very short half-life, there is minimal accumulation of the short half-life isotopes and as such do not build up into a large enough quantity to pose any significant hazard.

cont.

hwlooi said...

cont.

I will try to explain by this simple analogy.
If there are 2 million people waiting outside a stadium and 1 million people managed to get into the stadium after 14,000,000,000 years (half-life of Thorium-232), it means that you will see only 1 person getting into the stadium every 14,000 years.

But once in the stadium the half-life of the new person (half-life of Radon-220 from the Thorium-232 decay chain is only 55 seconds) is so short when compared with those outside (Thorium-232) that he has left the stadium almost immediately. Getting in is extremely slow but getting out is extremely fast!

Since only 1 person gets into the stadium every 14,000 years, if you look into the stadium you will see it as empty most of the time!
It is just like trying to fill up a bucket by a slow, slow drop by drop drip and the bucket has a big hole at the bottom. If you look into the bucket you will see practically little or no water in it!
Since the Lynas waste product has only 6 Bq/gm of radioactivity, the chance of detecting any significant amount of radon gas is pretty slim indeed.


4.Unnatural Routes of Entry

The only way Thorium can gain entry into the body is by injection. In the past where huge doses of 25cc to 50 cc of a 25%solution of Thorium dioxide (Thorotrast) was injected into the vein for contrast radiological studies, a very small number of patients were believed to have developed cancers 20 to 30 years later. Even with these extremely high unnatural doses, there was no acute toxicity.

In the south of the state of Kerala in India the soil contains as much as 4,000 ppm (parts of Thorium per million). Studies have shown that there is little or no accumulation of Thorium-232 in the inhabitants.

The Lynas waste contains only 1,650 ppm.

Over the last 40 years since I developed a special interest in nuclear medicine and particle physics, I have not come across any well documented and well proven report of any human being severely injured or killed by accidental or environmental inhalation or ingestion of Thorium-232.

We need to compare this with the 15,000 people murdered in the USA every year and the 2 to 3 million people killed by Malaria worldwide yearly!

So if Thorium cannot enter the body in significant amounts by ingestion or inhalation and alpha rays do not pose an external threat, what's all the big fuss about the Lynas rare earth plant ?

It should also be noted that Australians are delighted that a company called Arafura is building a huge Rare Earth Processing Plant costing over A$1 Billion in Whyalla in South Australia.

This plant is expected to produce over 1,000 high paying jobs for the Australians.

Arafura must be hoping that we are stupid enough to stop Lynas and stop competing with them.

Remember the Tin slag from the Eastern Smelting and Straits Trading in Penang ? These, which contain the tantalum and monazite ore, and the monazite ore can be more than 3,700 % more radioactive than the Lynas waste.

And these radioactive tin slag were used to fill up the old Penang Stadium and the roads in Penang. A lot of these has already been stolen and sold off at a huge profit, but a lot still remains in the roads in Butterworth and Penang island.

The people in Penang have not developed Cancer so far as a result of these slag!

Dr Looi

hwlooi said...

Thorium-232 has a half-life of 14 billion years and our descendants will be exposed to dangerous radiation for over 14 billion years?


This is absolutely not true and is a very common misconception.

In fact there was a ridiculous claim in the Sin Chew Newspaper by the chairman of a certain NGO that since Thorium-232 has a half-life of 14 Billion years, it is very dangerous for an extremely long time and will even affect our descendants!

He should not be making any such nonsensical statements if he has absolutely no basic knowledge of even elementary kindergarten physics.

THE LONGER THE HALF-LIFE OF A SUBSTANCE THE LESS IS THE RADIOACTIVITY and as such the less dangerous it is.

As a simple analogy, if it takes 14,000,000,000 years for half of a house to be burnt, there is no chance of anybody getting hurt. But if it takes only 14 minutes for half of the house to be burnt down, a lot of people will be injured or killed.

Lead-208 i.e. the so-called non-radioactive lead has an even longer half-life of
19 Million Billion Years and as such the radioactivity is so low that it is practically undetectable and we use it in our car batteries.

Thorium-232 which is the only significant radioactive element found in the Lynas waste has an incredibly long half-life of 14 billion years and as such is much less radioactive than the Potassium-40 whose half-life is only 1.25 billion years.

Comparison of Radioactivity in Bq (number of atoms decaying in 1second)

Pure Thorium-232 = 4,080 Bq/gm
Pure Potassium-40 (Half-life of 1.25 billion yrs) = 254,000 Bq/gm
Naturally Occurring Potassium (3 different isotopes) in our body and food = 31.825 Bq/gm
Artificially created Plutonium-238 (1/2 life=87.7 years)
= 634,000,000,000 Bq/gm
Lynas Rare Earth Waste = 6 Bq/gm

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London)

*
http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242


http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/16/rare-earth-a-richer-malaysia-and-a-greener-world/#comment-76493






hwlooi said...

Lynas radioactive and toxic waste will polute our air and water?

Kuantan People Not Miners and Lynas plant is not a rare earth mine.

Quote:
"vast tracts of lands and thousands of square kilometres have been rendered hazardous, with toxic runoffs destroying everything in their path, and with high radioactivity, tainting and polluting precious water supplies." Unquote

I HAVE TO KEEP REPEATING THAT KUANTAN PEOPLE ARE NOT MINERS IN THE RARE EARTH OR URANIUM OR THORIUM MINES.

The " with toxic runoffs destroying everything in their path, and with high radioactivity, tainting and polluting precious water supplies.",
ARE FROM THE MINES AND NOT FROM THE ULTRA-MODERN REFINING CHEMICAL PLANTS!

PLEASE DO NOT KEEP ON REFERRING US IN KUANTAN AND COMPARING US TO "THE WORKERS IN THE MINES EXPOSED TO THORIUM BY INHALATION OF FINE PARTICLES !

" Thorium-232 is considered to be a carcinogen only IF ADMINISTERED INTRAVENOUSLY AS A COLLOIDAL DISPERSION OF THORIUM-232 DIOXIDE."

AND NOBODY FROM LYNAS IS GOING AROUND IN KUANTAN INJECTING US WITH THORIUM DIOXIDE !!

I REPEAT: KUANTAN PEOPLE ARE NOT RARE EARTH OR THORIUM MINERS !

The rare earth miners in the case of the Lynas Rare Earth Plant are still in a place called Mount Weld in Western Australia !

If there is any long term lung problem, the Australians are the ones who will be getting those problems and not the Kuantan people.

Kuantan people are just ordinary traders, office workers, taxi drivers or just hanging around doing nothing in the air-conditioned malls.

It is tantamount to claiming that since workers in the granite quarries and underground tin mines developed severe lung disease (silicosis) and lung cancer from inhaling dust containing silica (sand), the millions of tons of sand in our beaches should be relocated to somewhere safe or shipped back to...?Australia.

Definite evidence that crystalline silica (Sand, Sio2) is associated with an increased rate of lung cancer led the International Agency for Research on
Cancer (IARC) to conclude in 1997 that crystalline silica is a known human
carcinogen.

You can find the data even in Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IARC_Group_1_carcinogens

Normally the IARC list do not detail the conditions which is attached to the agent before it can be deemed to be carcinogenic.

You can find the data in the IARC monograph when they approved the labelling of Thorium-232 as a carcinogen.

For instance even ordinary Sand (crystalline silica, SiO2) is classified as a group 1 Carcinogen (a confirmed cancer causing agent), but as you know, we do not expect a huge number of people in living in the deserts or along the seashores to die from silica induced lung cancer.
The lung cancer risk occurs only when fine sand (silica) is inhaled by miners for a prolonged period in the quarries and mines i.e. silica is not a carcinogen when ingested and of course not when injected for nobody would allow you to inject sand into their veins.

The same condition apply to Thorium-232 i.e.
" Thorium-232 is considered to be a carcinogen only IF ADMINISTERED INTRAVENOUSLY AS A COLLOIDAL DISPERSION OF THORIUM-232 DIOXIDE."

Practically all the data on Thorium-232 and cancer comes from the intravenous injection of Thorotrast.
In the past where huge doses of 25cc to 50 cc of a 25%solution of Thorium dioxide (Thorotrast) was injected into the vein for contrast radiological studies, a very small number out of the 4 million or so patients were believed to have developed cancers 20 to 30 years later in their old age.

I repeat: NOBODY FROM LYNAS IS GOING AROUND IN KUANTAN INJECTING US WITH THORIUM DIOXIDE !!

hwlooi said...

According to the USA EPA, Thorium-232 can get into the body easily by Inhalation?


There are only 2 natural ways of getting any substance into your body:

1. By Eating it (Ingestion) or

2. By Breathing it (Inhalation)

Thorium-232 in clay soil cannot get into you blood stream if you eat it because of it's strong adsorption to clay (stuck firmly to clay).

As explained below, you need to eat far more than 17,000 Kilograms of Lynas waste before you can get cancer in about 30 years time in your old age.

Likewise, you need to breathe in 3.4 Kilograms of Lynas waste (in order to get 5.58 gm of Thorium or 1 vial of Thorotrast) to get cancer in about 30 years time !

As stated, Kuantan people are not MINERS and as such it is impossible to inhale 3.4 Kilograms even in a life-time !

Thorium-232 is harmless when outside the body as it produces only alpha rays which cannot penetrate even a thin piece of paper.

All you have to do is to wrap it up in a piece of newspaper and it will become virtually non-radioactive.

So if Thoriun-232 cannot get into the body in significant amount by inhalation or ingestion and it poses no external threat,

HOW and WHY on earth IS IT CONSIDERED TO BE SO DANGEROUS BY THE ANTI-LYNAS PEOPLE ?
My Reply to Letter in the Sun Daily

“LET’S de-politicize the Lynas issue” (Letters, March 23) refers.


The writer said 0.02% to 0.05% of ingested thorium is absorbed and gets into the blood stream.

Absorption studies were done on animals for obvious reasons, and in the vast majority of these, the thorium was not mixed with clay, which binds very strongly to the clay particles i.e. adsorbed.


Thorium-232 is strongly bound (adsorbed) by soil especially clay soil. The thorium concentration in the clay particles is about 500,000% higher than in the water between the clay particles (the interstitial spaces of the clay particles). So, it cannot be leached out by water or intestinal juice.

When ingested, there is insignificant absorption of the thorium because of this strong bond between clay particles and thorium. Practically all the thorium will be excreted in the faeces with the clay.


So the actual amount of thorium that is absorbed into the blood stream when mixed with clay soil as in the case of the Lynas waste is much, much less than 0.02%.


Since Lynas waste contains 1,650 parts of thorium per million and even if we take the inflated rate of 0.02% absorption, it would mean that to get 0.33g of thorium into the blood stream, we have to swallow 1,000kg (1 tonne) of Lynas waste!


Practically all the data on the carcinogenic effects of thorium-232 was obtained retrospectively from the intravenous use of a massive dose of thorium dioxide called Thorotrast (a 25cc vial of a 25% colloidal suspension of thorium dioxide) in investigative radiological studies.


Studies appear to show that a small number out of the 4 million patients who were given this massive dose of 1 or 2 vials (containing 5.58g to 11.7g of thorium) of Thorotrast, developed cancer especially of the liver 20 to 30 years later in their old age.


So in order to get 5.58g of thorium-232 (equivalent to 1 vial of Thorotrast), we have to swallow an incredible 17,000kg or 17 tonnes of Lynas waste!


I do not think anybody in Kuantan will be able to swallow 17 tonnes of Lynas waste … and that is assuming that the thorium-232 is not strongly adsorbed to clay particles.


With respect to the inhalation of thorium-232, all studies were conducted on workers in the uranium or thorium mining or refining industry and not on populations in towns like Kuantan, and therefore do not apply to the present issue.

Dr Looi

hwlooi said...

Thorium-232 is Carcinogenic According to IARC?


One of the anti-lynas people maintained that the International Agency for Research for Cancer IARC listed Thorium-232 as a group 1 Carcinogen (a definite cancer causing drug).

But this is only a half truth.

Thorium-232 is considered a group 1 carcinogen on condition that :

" Thorium-232 is considered to be a carcinogen only IF ADMINISTERED INTRAVENOUSLY AS A COLLOIDAL DISPERSION OF THORIUM-232 DIOXIDE."

That is it is a cancer causing agent ONLY if the Thorium-232 is injected into the vein and NOT a cancer causing agent if it is ingested or inhaled.
In other words, Thorium-232 can cause cancer ONLY if someone inject you with a large amount (5.8 gm or 1 vial of Thorotrast) of Thorium dioxide directly into your veins.

NOBODY FROM LYNAS IS GOING ROUND INJECTING THE KUANTAN PEOPLE WITH THORIUM-232!

You can find the data even in Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IARC_Group_1_carcinogens

Normally the IARC list do not detail the conditions which is attached to the agent before it can be deemed to be carcinogenic.

You can find the data in the IARC monograph when they approved the labelling of Thorium-232 as a carcinogen.

For instance ordinary Sand (crystalline silica, SiO2) is classified as a group 1 Carcinogen (a confirmed cancer causing agent), but as you know, we do not expect a huge number of people in living in the deserts or along the seashores to die from cancer.

The lung cancer risk occurs only when fine sand (silica) is inhaled by miners for a prolonged period in the quarries and mines i.e. silica is not a carcinogen when ingested and of course not when injected for nobody would allow you to inject sand into their veins.

The same condition apply to Thorium-232 i.e.
" Thorium-232 is considered to be a carcinogen only IF ADMINISTERED INTRAVENOUSLY AS A COLLOIDAL DISPERSION OF THORIUM-232 DIOXIDE."


Part of the IARC list of Carcinogens in :


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IARC_Group_1_carcinogens
• Schistosoma haematobium (infection with)
• Silica, crystalline (inhaled in the form of quartz or cristobalite from occupational sources)
• Solar radiation
• Talc containing asbestiform fibres
• Tamoxifen5
• 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-para-dioxin
• Thiotepa (1,1',1"-Phosphinothioylidynetrisaziridine)
• Thorium-232 and its decay products, administered intravenously as a colloidal dispersion of thorium-232 dioxide
• Treosulfan
• ortho-Toluidine
• Vinyl chloride
• Ultraviolet Radiation
• X-Radiation and Gamma radiation

cont.

hwlooi said...

cont.

In Bukit Merah, the radiation comes from Thorium and Uranium which are our own and has been in Malaysia for billions of years.

Although the radiation level is well over 37 times that of the Lynas waste, there is no definite well controlled scientific proof that the cases of leukaemia and birth defects are caused by radiation from the waste.

I have seen lots of cases of leukaemia and other types of cancer as well as birth defects over the last 40 years or so and unfortunately we do not have Lynas around at that time to use as a scapegoat.

Unscrupulous people have been using videos and pictures of patients with congenital abnormalities and other illnesses to instil fear into the population. There is absolutely no scientific proof that these cases are caused by radiation.

Only people with ulterior motives would use pictures and videos of these unfortunate patients whose disorders have nothing to do with radiation to score political points !

In the south of the state of Kerala in India the soil contains as much as 4,000 ppm (parts of Thorium per million). Studies have shown that there is little or no accumulation of Thorium-232 in the inhabitants.

The Lynas waste contains only 1,650 ppm.

It has been estimated that in the worst case scenario, the radiation risk from the Lynas plant is only 0.002 mSv/yr.

In Ramsar, Iran, the naturally occurring radiation
is extremely high at 260 mSv/yr.
This is 13,000,000% higher than the expected worse case scenario in Kuantan.

And the people in Ramsar, Iran has been found to be healthier and live longer than the rest of the Iranians! There is also no increase in the number of cancer cases.

Remember the Tin slag from the Eastern Smelting and Straits Trading in Penang ? These, which contain the tantalum and monazite ore, and the monazite ore can be more than 3,700 % more radioactive than the Lynas waste.

And these radioactive tin slag were used to fill up the old Penang Stadium and the roads in Penang. A lot of these has already been stolen and sold off at a huge profit, but a lot still remains in the roads in Butterworth and Penang island.

The people in Penang have not developed Cancer so far as a result of these slag!

Even ordinary Sand (crystalline silica, SiO2) is classified as a group 1 Carcinogen (a confirmed cancer causing agent), but as you know, we do not expect a huge number of people in living in the deserts or along the seashores to die from silica induced lung cancer.

The lung cancer risk occurs only when fine sand (silica) is inhaled by miners for a prolonged period in the quarries and mines i.e. silica is not a carcinogen when ingested and of course not when injected for nobody would allow you to inject sand into their veins.

Thorium-232 is a very weakly radioactive substance and produces only alpha particles which cannot even penetrate a thin piece of paper.

All you have to do is to wrap it up in a piece of newspaper and it is for all intents and purposes, non-radioactive !

" Thorium-232 is considered to be a carcinogen only IF ADMINISTERED INTRAVENOUSLY AS A COLLOIDAL DISPERSION OF THORIUM-232 DIOXIDE."
It is not considered to be a cancer causing substance if taken orally or inhaled according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer IARC, just like silica (sand) which is not carcinogenic if ingested.

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London)

hwlooi said...

If radiation from the Lynas plant is not dangerous, why is it that so many people in Kuantan believe that it is dangerous and want it stopped?


Most of the people in Kuantan have been misled by some very sophisticated ultra-devious people who are experts in mass brainwashing the people and who are using the issue to gain political mileage.

I do not know who these people are but one thing is sure and that is, these people are brilliant geniuses who unfortunately are misusing their talents.

In Bukit Merah, the radiation comes from Thorium and Uranium which are our own and has been in Malaysia for billions of years.

Although the radiation level is well over 37 times that of the Lynas waste, there is no definite well controlled scientific proof that the cases of leukaemia and birth defects are caused by radiation from the waste.

I have seen lots of cases of leukaemia and other types of cancer as well as birth defects over the last 40 years or so and unfortunately we do not have Lynas around at that time to use as a scapegoat.

Unscrupulous people have been using videos and pictures of patients with congenital abnormalities and other illnesses to instil fear into the population. There is absolutely no scientific proof that these cases are caused by radiation.

In the south of the state of Kerala in India the soil contains as much as 4,000 ppm (parts of Thorium per million). Studies have shown that there is little or no accumulation of Thorium-232 in the inhabitants.

The Lynas waste contains only 1,650 ppm.

It has been estimated that in the worst case scenario, the radiation risk from the Lynas plant is only 0.002 mSv/yr.

In Ramsar, Iran, the naturally occurring radiation
is extremely high at 260 mSv/yr.
This is 13,000,000% higher than the expected worse case scenario in Kuantan.

And the people in Ramsar, Iran has been found to be healthier and live longer than the rest of the Iranians! There is also no increase in the number of cancer cases.

Remember the Tin slag from the Eastern Smelting and Straits Trading in Penang ? These, which contain the tantalum and monazite ore, and the monazite ore can be more than 3,700 % more radioactive than the Lynas waste.

And these radioactive tin slag were used to fill up the old Penang Stadium and the roads in Penang. A lot of these has already been stolen and sold off at a huge profit, but a lot still remains in the roads in Butterworth and Penang island.

The people in Penang have not developed Cancer so far as a result of these slag!

Even ordinary Sand (crystalline silica, SiO2) is classified as a group 1 Carcinogen (a confirmed cancer causing agent), but as you know, we do not expect a huge number of people in living in the deserts or along the seashores to die from silica induced lung cancer.

The lung cancer risk occurs only when fine sand (silica) is inhaled by miners for a prolonged period in the quarries and mines i.e. silica is not a carcinogen when ingested and of course not when injected for nobody would allow you to inject sand into their veins.

Thorium-232 is a very weakly radioactive substance and produces only alpha particles which cannot even penetrate a thin piece of paper.
All you have to do is to wrap it up in a piece of newspaper and it is for all intents an purposes, is non-radioactive !

" Thorium-232 is considered to be a carcinogen only IF ADMINISTERED INTRAVENOUSLY AS A COLLOIDAL DISPERSION OF THORIUM-232 DIOXIDE."
It is not considered to be a cancer causing substance if taken orally or inhaled according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer IARC, just like silica (sand) which is not carcinogenic if ingested.

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah

hwlooi said...

What about the "Tragedy" in Bukit Merah?


In Bukit Merah, the radiation comes from Thorium and Uranium which are our own and has been in Malaysia for billions of years.

Although the radiation level is well over 37 times that of the Lynas waste, there is no definite well controlled scientific proof that the cases of leukaemia and birth defects are caused by radiation from the waste.

COMPARISON OF RADIOACTIVITY IN Bq (Specific activity.. number of atoms decaying in 1second)

Pure Thorium-232 = 4,080 Bq/gm

Pure Potassium-40 = 254,000 Bq/gm

Naturally Occurring Potassium (3 different isotopes) in our body and food = 31.825 Bq/gm

Artificially created Plutonium-238 = 634,000,000,000 Bq/gm (1/2 life=87.7 years)

Monazite ore from Amang or Tin Tailings in Malaysia = 284 Bq/gm

Lynas Rare Earth Waste = 6 Bq/gm

Public dose limits for exposure from uranium mining or nuclear plants are usually set at 1 mSv per year above background.

According to the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement (NCRP) and its international counterpart, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). Both of these organizations offer recommendations for the maximum permissible dose (MPD) of radiation.

General Public annual MPD by both NCRP and ICRP is 1 mSv.

For Radiation Workers, the annual MPD is 50 mSv (NCRP) and 20 mSv (ICRP), with a cumulative MPD of 10 mSv x Age.

MPD during pregnancy is 5 mSv (NCRP) and 2 mSv (ICRP).

However, experts including Professor Wade Allison of Oxford University argue that the dose limit can safely be raised to 100 millisieverts, based on current health statistics.

Compare this with the dose of 0.002 millisieverts/year of exposure for people living within 1 km of the Lynas plant in the worst case scenario (estimated by Lynas).

I have seen lots of cases of leukaemia and other types of cancer as well as birth defects over the last 40 years or so and unfortunately we do not have Lynas around at that time to use as a scapegoat.

Unscrupulous people have been using videos and pictures of patients with congenital abnormalities and other illnesses to instil fear into the population. There is absolutely no scientific proof that these cases are caused by radiation.

Only people with ulterior motives would use pictures and videos of these unfortunate patients whose disorders have nothing to do with radiation to score political points!

cont.

hwlooi said...

cont.

In the south of the state of Kerala in India the soil contains as much as 4,000 ppm (parts of Thorium per million). Studies have shown that there is little or no accumulation of Thorium-232 in the inhabitants.

The Lynas waste contains only 1,650 ppm.

It has been estimated that in the worst case scenario, the radiation risk within a 1 km radius from the Lynas plant is only 0.002 mSv/yr.

In Ramsar, Iran, the naturally occurring radiation
is extremely high at 260 mSv/yr.
This is 13,000,000% higher than the expected worse case scenario in Kuantan.

And the people in Ramsar, Iran has been found to be healthier and live longer than the rest of the Iranians! There is also no increase in the number of cancer cases.

Remember the Tin slag from the Eastern Smelting and Straits Trading in Penang ? These, which contain the tantalum and monazite ore, and the monazite ore can be more than 3,700 % more radioactive than the Lynas waste.

And these radioactive tin slag were used to fill up the old Penang Stadium and the roads in Penang. A lot of these has already been stolen and sold off at a huge profit, but a lot still remains in the roads in Butterworth and Penang island.

The people in Penang have not developed Cancer so far as a result of these slag!

The anti-Lynas people who are so paranoid about imported radiation from Australia should have a look at this paper published in the Malaysian Journal of Analytical Sciences which showed that the level of radiation in areas where tin was mined. The waste or amang contains high levels of Monazite and other minerals which are highly radioactive.

All these old tin mine areas are well populated. Note even Kuala Lumpur is also an ex-tin mining area.

A study was done University Technology MARA in Kg Gajah in Perak :

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:CsxxK6PTXGwJ:www.ukm.my/mjas/v12_n2/zaini%2520hamzah.pdf+concentration+of+thorium+in+malaysian+soil&hl=en&gl=my&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESi6dZOSD4j7m0JTW7CTVJRQoPlLPaLvlj0TlmGH81bgfv0iz6olM8A-TDVl5RJ7UThRG8OV7jJm1uj6C2sF2Xz1ip1oJTrPv5P2X7KbAoRXPQj1LTi16cmTfwjL8g6IVJlQCRE-&sig=AHIEtbQN1IoA3JZOvIjgUhbxyO45iKlDcw&pli=1

Quote: " The level of surface dose varies from one location to another, but there is a critical area which has a significantly high surface dose approaching 30 microSv/hr " Unquote

30 microSv/hr is about 260 mSv/year or about the same level as the highest recorded area in Ramsar!.

Even ordinary Sand (crystalline silica, SiO2) is classified as a group 1 Carcinogen (a confirmed cancer causing agent), but as you know, we do not expect a huge number of people in living in the deserts or along the seashores to die from silica induced lung cancer.

The lung cancer risk occurs only when fine sand (silica) is inhaled by miners for a prolonged period in the quarries and mines i.e. silica is not a carcinogen when ingested and of course not when injected for nobody would allow you to inject sand into their veins.

Thorium-232 is a very weakly radioactive substance and produces only alpha particles which cannot even penetrate a thin piece of paper.
All you have to do is to wrap it up in a piece of newspaper and it is for all intents and purposes, non-radioactive !

" Thorium-232 is considered to be a carcinogen only IF ADMINISTERED INTRAVENOUSLY AS A COLLOIDAL DISPERSION OF THORIUM-232 DIOXIDE."
It is not considered to be a cancer causing substance if taken orally or inhaled according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer IARC, just like silica (sand) which is not carcinogenic if ingested.

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London)

hwlooi said...

If the radiation from the Lynas waste is negligible, what about the toxic chemical waste?

If you really want to go 100% GREEN,
Close Down All Our Factories, Industrial Plants, Power Plants, Oil Rigs etc, and Become a 4th World Country and Send Our Daughters and Granddaughters To Myanmar and Kampuchea to Work as Domestic Servants!

I have always maintained that the main problem is not radiation but the normal chemical toxic wastes from a normal chemical plant.

I agree that there is also a fear that the waste will be dumped all over the place. Unfortunately, this risk also apply to all our factories and plants. Should we demand that all our factories and plants to be closed down so that we can go back to the good old days of tapping rubber and plucking coconuts for the BIG WHITE MAN?

And why is it that we only target Lynas and not the rest of all our factories and industrial plants which produce far more toxic wastes especially our own oil palm mills and tin mining and smelting industries?

Using the same logic we should ask all these plants to send all their wastes back to Germany, England, US etc. I bet with you nobody would want to invest in Malaysia. We will remain poor and may have to send our daughters and granddaughters to work as lowly domestic maids in other countries.

Quote Ng Ai Soo

"And what about other pollution and/or radiation sources in the environment before Lynas even starts. For example, a 1,000MW coal plant after just 1 year of operation produces 6,000,000 tons of CO2, 44,000 tons of SO2, 22,000 tons of NO2, 320,000 tons of ash containing 400 tons of heavy metals (arsenic, mercury, cadmium, lead etc.) and, here’s the kicker, including 5 tons of Uranium and 12 tons of Thorium from which the radon gas of both decay chains are out the chimney and into our air... and we are building TWO of these now to add to those we already have on the peninsula."


I hope the explanation by Jonathan Fun will also help.

cont.

hwlooi said...

By Jonathan Fun reply to Hon. Prof Chan's Letter




Quote:

"I read with great interest the debate and evidences shown by both sides.

While acknowledging Prof. Chan's arguments, doubts, concerns, and counter-evidences on the effects of Thorium, I must agree with Datuk Dr. Looi and Ng Ai Soo's points in what I'd like to call "Selective Rejection".

We all know the effects of Thorium to our health through the inhalation route; microscopic thorium dusts entering our bloodstream, majority of those amounts will be deposited in our bone marrows and stays there for the next 22 years, emitting alpha radiation, increasing risks to cancer, etc.

But again, consider Ng Ai Soo's comment from Chan's previous article :

" And what about other pollution and/or radiation sources in the environment before Lynas even starts. For example, a 1,000MW coal plant after just 1 year of operation produces 6,000,000 tons of CO2, 44,000 tons of SO2, 22,000 tons of NO2, 320,000 tons of ash containing 400 tons of heavy metals (arsenic, mercury, cadmium, lead etc.)

And, here’s the kicker, including 5 tons of Uranium and 12 tons of Thorium from which the radon gas of both decay chains are out the chimney and into our air... and we are building TWO of these now to add to those we already have on the peninsula." Unquote

"In fact, the fly ash emitted by a power plant—a by-product from burning coal for electricity—carries into the surrounding environment 100 times more radiation than a nuclear power plant producing the same amount of energy." (Quote from Scientific American)

Where do we store this waste? Does this waste go into making our roads or construction material? What is Lynas waste in comparison?! How did we manage to put up with that yearly radioactive and toxic waste, and plan to build more of the same, with no objection from you?

Be fair... if you want to protect us from industrial radiation pollution, then tackle the whole lot of them in proportion to their pollution, not just Lynas. Dr. Looi's presentation of the facts is clear and persuasive compared with the unnecessary fear, uncertainty and doubt that taints your article in reply to him. "

The keyword here IMHO is "Uncertainty", which brings us back to the discussion of the "Precautionary Principle".

There is nothing wrong being doubtful of the effects of Thorium, hence rejecting it, and there is nothing wrong being confident that Thorium wastes that will be produced by Lynas if they are given the green light to operate, are going to be safe, given the scientific facts that proves it.

But what I'd like to implore those hardcore Anti-Lynas/Anti-Rare Earth/Anti-Whatever friends out there to understand, is that when we make a stand, it must be based on a principle, and for the stand to be credible and fair, it must be applied across the board.

So we know iron/copper mines also produces not just Thorium, but Radium and Uranium wastes too.

And we know rock phosphate fertilizer production facilities also produces not just Thorium, but Radium and Uranium wastes too.

Hence, if the reason we are all so head over heals about throwing Lynas out of our shores is because of the potential hazards of Thorium, or the uncertainty that Thorium will be safe, then let our will be done. Reject Lynas. Get them out of the country. Shoo.

But we can't let existing industries which are also producing Thorium wastes, like iron/copper mines and fertilizer plants, to continue operating as well. Reject any industry that produces Thorium wastes. Get them out of the country. Shoo.

Can we all agree on this stand? Else going all out to reject Lynas while allowing existing industries that also produces Thorium wastes to continue operation is just plain hypocritical. "


Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London)

hwlooi said...

The Problem: A Mountain of Lynas Waste ?


A reader once asked " Would it be safe to say 132,000,000,000 Bq will be resulting from 22,000 tonnes of Lynas waste even though it has only 6 Bq per gm?"

Well, Thorium-232 produces only alpha rays (gamma rays from daughter isotopes are insignificant, please see below) which cannot pass through even a thin piece of paper or the surface of the skin.

If you have a lump of pure Thorium-232, all you need to do is to wrap it up in newspaper and that will stop all the alpha radiation from getting out!

Since alpha particles of Thorium-232 which decay with energies of 3.8 to about 4.8 MeV can travel only a couple of centimetres in air, only less than 28 micron in fluids and much less in solid material, even if you have a huge pile of Lynas waste, the external radiation would not increase by much because only a tiny percentage of thorium-232 atoms directly on the surface of the pile will be able to radiate out their alpha particles.

Those just below the surface will remain inside the pile. Each alpha particle will just pick up 2 electrons and be converted to the simple non-radioactive helium gas.

Even those alpha particles from the surface will be converted to harmless helium gas after a few centimetres through the air.

So all that your mountain of Lynas waste will only "radiate" harmless non-radioactive Helium gas.

That's why I always tell the anti-lynas clique that I have no problem in keeping a few hundred kilograms of pure Thorium-232 in my house. Because I would be keeping the Thorium-232 in the form of a solid metallic sphere where the surface area to unit volume is minimum and since metallic Thorium-232 is superb radiation shield, practically all the tiny amount of radiation produced, are auto-shielded by the metallic Thorium-232 ! Radiation risk from pure Thorium-232 is minute and keeping it in a the form of a metallic sphere and wrapping it up in newspaper would cut the radiation to a completely harmless level !

The radiation of 6 Bq/gm from the weakly radioactive Thorium-232 in the Lynas waste is so low that even IAEA do not consider it significant and as such can be transported without any special permission.

One reader stated that although Thorium-232 may not be dangerous, all their "daughter" isotopes have very short half-lives like Radon-220 and these are highly radioactive, so how could we say that Thorium-232 is not dangerous.

Well, the reason is obvious. But I find great difficulty in explaining to the layman the reason why when an element with an extremely long half-life that decays into isotopes with very short half-life, there is minimal accumulation of the short half-life isotopes and as such do not build up into a large enough quantity to pose any significant hazard.

I will try to explain by this simple analogy.
If there are 2 million people waiting outside a stadium and 1 million people managed to get into the stadium after 14,000,000,000 years (half-life of Thorium-232), it means that you will see only 1 person getting into the stadium every 14,000 years.

But once in the stadium the half-life of the new person (half-life of Radon-220 from the Thorium-232 decay chain is only 55 seconds) is so short when compared with those outside (Thorium-232) that he has left the stadium almost immediately. Getting in is extremely slow but getting out is extremely fast!

Since only 1 person gets into the stadium every 14,000 years, if you look into the stadium you will see it as empty most of the time!

It is just like trying to fill up a bucket by a slow, slow drop by drop drip and the bucket has a big hole at the bottom. If you look into the bucket you will see practically little or no water in it!

Since the Lynas waste product has only 6 Bq/gm of radioactivity, the chance of detecting any significant amount of radon gas is pretty slim indeed.

Dato' Dr Looi

hwlooi said...

Do Not Be too Paranoid about Radiation for Radiation is Everywhere. EVEN YOUR WIFE IS RADIOACTIVE!

Even our DNA is radioactive as the highly radioactive Carbon-14 which constitute a part of the DNA molecule undergoes beta decay by emission of an electron and an antineutrino and changes into Nitrogen-14.
So even our sacred DNA changes with time as a result of this intrinsic radioactivity.

The potassium tablets that your doctor gives you as an adjunct for high blood pressure therapy is highly radioactive with a radioactivity of 32 Bq/gm and we need about 2 to 3 grams of potassium per day to stay alive.

The radioactivity comes from potassium-40. This is more than 500% the radioactivity of the Lynas waste which contains only 6 Bq/gm mainly from Thorium-232.

Potassium when taken stays in the intracellular space where the cancer sensitive chromosomes are located whereas the ingested or inhaled Thorium-232 remains in the extracellular (outside the cell) space.

All the potassium that we eat everyday in our food contains potassium-40 and the normal dietary potassium would give a total of about 80 Bq per day.
Compare this with the Lynas waste which produces only 6 Bq/gm

Even your wife or husband is radioactive, with a radioactivity of 4,000 Bq from Potassium-40 and another 3,000 Bq from Carbon-14 giving a total of about 7,000 Bq!

Sleeping next to someone (i.e. your wife or husband) for 8 hours a day will lead to an exposure of 0.02 mSv/year (Source: UNSCEAR and EPA).

Since all living cells contain potassium, all types of meat, flesh, fruits, nuts and vegetables are radioactive because of the potassium-40 content.

The so-called sodium free salt recommended by health experts to combat high blood pressure is nothing more than just highly radioactive potassium salt! Even a lot of doctors, specialists and professors do not know this!

The message here is that more radioactive substances are freely sold in the shops and used as a fertilizer or eaten by us than you would otherwise thought.

cont.

hwlooi said...

cont.

Dr. Gary H. Kramer, who is the Head of the National Internal Radiation Assessment Section at Health Canada:

“Potassium chloride can be found in large quantities in stores selling materials for water treatment. The potassium content is about 500 g kg-
Typically, the material is sold in 20 kg bags so each bag contains ~600 kBq of 40K giving a concentration of 30 Bq g-1. This is well above the exclusion level yet the material is handled as non-radioactive. The external dose rate in close proximity to a typical display in these types of shops would be about 150 microSv hr-1.
A worker would only need to be near the pile for about 7 hours to exceed the public dose limit of 1 mSv.”

Guarapari which has a population about 100,000 is a coastal town in Brazil.

Every year, many people visit the beach with black sand in this town for swimming and treatment of rheumatic disorders.

The usual beach sand in Guarapari has a radiation dose of 5 microsievert/hour.

The black sand is even higher with 131 microsievert/hour. Average radiation exposure of Guarapari is 175 milisievert/year.

The radioactivity is originated from the mountains rich in zirconites and monazites along the coast.

Ramsar is a city in Iran with population of more than 31,000. The average dose of radiation received by people in Ramsar is about 10 milisievert/year, and can reach level in excess of 260 milisievert/year.

Most of the radiation in the area is due to dissolved Radium-226 in water of 9 hot springs along with smaller amounts of uranium and thorium due to travertine (limestone) deposits.

Kerala is a coastal belt in India. A study conducted in 1990 covered 76,000 households in 12 local councils of Karunagapally.

The radiation at Karunagapally has been assessed at 5 to 8 milisievert/year. In certain location on the coast, it is as high as 70 milisievert/year. Thorium was mined in this area from monazites.

Quote from Wikipedia: "This high level of radiation does not seem to have caused ill effects on the residents of the area and even possibly has made them slightly more radioresistant, which is puzzling and has been called "radiation paradox". It has also been reported that residents have healthier and longer lives.

On the basis of this and other evidence including the fact that life had originated in a much more irradiated environment, some scientists have questioned the validity of linear no-threshold model, on which all radiation regulations currently depend.

Others point out that some level of radiation might actually be good for health and have a positive effect on population based on the controversial radiation hormesis model, by jump starting DNA repair mechanisms inside the cell. "


Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London)

hwlooi said...

What about non-radioactive toxic wastes from
LYNAS?


And what about other pollution and/or radiation sources in the environment before Lynas even starts.

Quote Ng AS "For example, a 1,000MW coal plant after just 1 year of operation produces 6,000,000 tons of CO2, 44,000 tons of SO2, 22,000 tons of NO2, 320,000 tons of ash containing 400 tons of heavy metals (arsenic, mercury, cadmium, lead etc.) and, here’s the kicker, including 5 tons of Uranium and 12 tons of Thorium from which the radon gas of both decay chains are out the chimney and into our air... and we are building TWO of these now to add to those we already have on the peninsula.

Where do we store this waste? Does this waste go into making our roads or construction material? What is Lynas waste in comparison?! How did we manage to put up with that yearly radioactive and toxic waste, and plan to build more of the same, with no objection from the Anti-Lynas people? "

"In fact, the fly ash emitted by a power plant—a by-product from burning coal for electricity—carries into the surrounding environment 100 times more radiation than a nuclear power plant producing the same amount of energy." (Quote from Scientific American)

So to be fair we have to close down all our power plants, factories and industrial plants and go back to the good old days of plucking coconuts and tapping rubber for the BIG WHITE MAN!

The Anti-Lynas people are adamant that we should insist that Lynas waste be sent back to Australia.
Using the same logic, we should ask Intel, Motorolla, Seagate, Honda and all the foreign factories to send all their waste back to England, USA, Germany, Taiwan and Japan.

I can bet with you that no SANE foreigner would be stupid enough to invest in Malaysia and with all our factories closed we would remain a poor agricultural country.

AND OUR DESCENDANTS WILL HAVE TO SEND THEIR DAUGHTERS AND GRANDDAUGHTERS TO WORK AS MAIDS AND DOMESTIC SERVANTS IN MYAMMAR AND KAMPUCHEA!


cont.

hwlooi said...

Remember the Tin slag from the Eastern Smelting and Straits Trading in Penang ? These, which contain the tantalum and monazite ore, and the monazite ore can be more than 3,700 % more radioactive than the Lynas waste.

And these radioactive tin slag were used to fill up the old Penang Stadium and the roads in Penang. A lot of these has already been stolen and sold off at a huge profit, but a lot still remains in the roads in Butterworth and Penang island.

The people in Penang have not developed Cancer so far as a result of these slag!

Even ordinary Sand (crystalline silica, SiO2) is classified as a group 1 Carcinogen (a confirmed cancer causing agent), but as you know, we do not expect a huge number of people in living in the deserts or along the seashores to die from silica induced lung cancer.

The lung cancer risk occurs only when fine sand (silica) is inhaled by miners for a prolonged period in the quarries and mines i.e. silica is not a carcinogen when ingested and of course not when injected, for nobody would allow you to inject sand into their veins.

Thorium-232 is a very weakly radioactive substance and produces only alpha particles which cannot even penetrate a thin piece of paper.

All you have to do is to wrap it up in a piece of newspaper and it is for all intents and purposes will become non-radioactive !

" Thorium-232 is considered to be a carcinogen only IF ADMINISTERED INTRAVENOUSLY AS A COLLOIDAL DISPERSION OF THORIUM-232 DIOXIDE."

It is not considered to be a cancer causing substance if taken orally or inhaled according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer IARC, just like silica (sand) which is not carcinogenic if ingested.

Anti-Lynas quote " The USA has closed most of its mines, and so has China. In inner Mongolia, vast tracts of lands and thousands of square kilometres have been rendered hazardous, with toxic runoffs destroying everything in their path, and with high radioactivity, tainting and polluting precious water supplies." Unquote

I HAVE TO KEEP REPEATING THAT KUANTAN PEOPLE ARE NOT MINERS IN THE RARE EARTH OR URANIUM OR THORIUM MINES.

The " toxic runoffs destroying everything in their path, and with high radioactivity, tainting and polluting precious water supplies.",
IS FROM THE MINES AND NOT FROM THE MODERN REFINING CHEMICAL PLANTS!

PLEASE DO NOT KEEP COMPARING US TO "THE WORKERS IN THE MINES EXPOSED TO THORIUM BY INHALATION OF FINE PARTICLES !

" Thorium-232 is considered to be a carcinogen only IF ADMINISTERED INTRAVENOUSLY AS A COLLOIDAL DISPERSION OF THORIUM-232 DIOXIDE."

AND NOBODY FROM LYNAS IS GOING AROUND IN KUANTAN INJECTING US WITH THORIUM DIOXIDE !!

I REPEAT: KUANTAN PEOPLE ARE NOT RARE EARTH OR THORIUM MINERS !

The rare earth miners in the case of the Lynas Rare Earth Plant are still in a place called Mount Weld in Western Australia !

If there is any long term lung problem, the Australians are the ones who will be getting those problems and not the Kuantan people.

Kuantan people are just ordinary traders, office workers, taxi drivers or just hanging around doing nothing in the air-conditioned malls.

It is tantamount to claiming that since workers in the granite quarries and underground tin mines developed severe lung disease (silicosis) and lung cancer from inhaling dust containing silica (sand), the millions of tons of sand in our beaches should be relocated to somewhere safe or shipped back to...?Australia.

Definite evidence that crystalline silica (Sand, Sio2) is associated with an increased rate of lung cancer led the International Agency for Research on
Cancer (IARC) to conclude in 1997 that crystalline silica is a known human
carcinogen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IARC_Group_1_carcinogens

Dato' Dr Looi

hwlooi said...

Which is more radioactive, Potassium-40 or Thorium-232?

Recently one professor and one radiation specialist claimed that potassium-40 is far LESS radioactive than Thorium-232 and they cited the EPA (environment protection agency of American) and the WHO UNSCEAR as proof of their statements!

One of my friends who stated that K-40 is about 62 times more radioactive than Thorium-232 was rubbished by the radiation specialist!

Well, that depends on what we are talking about.

Quote " It was written somewhere above that potassium-40 is 62 times more radioactive than thorium. That is, I am sorry to note, a complete and utter rubbish:"
Unquote.


1. I think what my friend was thinking about is radioactivity in terms of Bq i.e. activity rather than biological effect (Sv) when he said potassium-40 is 62 times more radioactive than Thorium-232.

Pure Potassium-40 = 254,000 Bq/gram
Pure Thorium-232 = 4,080 Bq/gram

Therefore potassium-40 has about 62X more Bq than Thorium-232


Even in terms of biological effect, 1 gram of pure potassium-40 will still have a greater biological effect when compared with 1 gram of pure Thorium-232.


****************
Pure Potassium-40 = 254,000 Bq/gram

Quote from radiation specialist: 1 Becquerel per gram of K-40 in the soil (should actually be 1 Bq of K-40 per gram of soil) results in an increase in gamma-levels by ~0.042 microSieverts per hour (WHO UNSCEAR). Unquote

Therefore 254,000 Bq = 10,668 microSieverts/hour
(from 1 gram of pure potassium-40 i.e. not mixed with K-39 and K-41)

****************
Pure Thorium-232 = 4,080 Bq/gram

Quote from radiation specialist: Each becquerel per gram of Th-232 (should actually be 1 Bq of K-40 per gram of soil) increases this level by ~0.604 microSv/hour.


Therefore 4,080 Bq = 2,464 microSieverts/hour

*************************

10,668 microSv/hr divided by 2,464 microSv/hr = 4.33

or the biological effect of radiation from pure Potassium-40 is actually 4.33 times more than that of pure Thorium-232.

cont.

hwlooi said...

cont.


2. If we are talking about 1 gram of naturally occurring Potassium which contains only 0.0118% of K-40, then it is perfectly correct to say that Thorium-232 is more radioactive biologically than Potassium as the naturally occurring potassium has only 32 Bq per gram as compared to K-40 which has 254,000 Bq per gram.

So 32 Bq of K = 1.344 microSieverts/hr while 4080 Bq of Thorium-232 = 2,464 microSieverts/hr which is far more biologically radioactive than Potassium.


3. If we compare radioactivity in terms of becquerel (number of atoms decaying per second), 1 Bq of course is equal to 1 Bq in terms of activity.

But in terms of PER Bq (radioactivity from only one nuclear decay) the biological effect, according to UNSCEAR, Potassium-40 and natural potassium is less radioactive biologically than Thorium-232 (but remember that 1 gm potassium-40 has 254,000 atomic decay per sec while 1 gm of Thorium-232 has only 4.080 atomic decay per second ).

SO, BEFORE YOU RUBBISH ANYONE FOR SAYING THAT POTASSIUM-4O IS MORE RADIOACTIVE THAN THORIUM-232 OR VICE VERSA, MAKE SURE YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

It all depends on whether you are comparing activity (Bq) or biological effect (Sv), whether you are talking about pure potassium-40 or natural potassium which is composed of only 0.0118% highly radioactive K-40 and whether you are comparing Bq per gram of potassium-40 or Bq per gram of soil.

Moreover, we have to state that the Thorium-232 is not that of pure Thorium-232 as freshly isolated pure Thorium-232 do not produce any gamma rays and as such has practically no external biological effect (the 0.09 MeV of gamma rays in freshly isolated Thorium-232 actually comes from Radium-228).

The same arguments apply to the comparison of the cancer coefficients of potassium-40 and Thorium-232.

In fact, the biological dose 1 metre from a large pile of Thorium-232 is actually 0.39 microSv/hr/Bq/ (IAEA). The figure given by UNSCEAR of 0.69 microSv/hr/Bq is for an infinite plain with x Bq per gram of soil.

In fact the radiation specialist had to apologise to me and agree that it all depends on what we are trying to compare with.

Dr Looi
*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242

hwlooi said...

Quote:The Malaysian Medical Association (MMA) has warned that the Lynas rare earth processing plant will increase the risk of malignant cancers for those living in the vicinity. Unquote

When we say "MMA says" what we really mean is that ONLY 1 DOCTOR SAYS i.e. THE PRESIDENT OF THE MMA AND NOT ALL THE DOCTORS OR EVEN THE MAJORITY OF THE DOCTORS IN THE MMA because when the president of the MMA says something he did not take a vote of all the doctors or even some of the doctors in the association!

So this is the opinion of just the President of the MMA i.e. just 1 person and not that of ALL the doctors in the association. We have to make this very clear. HE OR SHE DEFINITELY DOES NOT SPEAK FOR ME !

We also have to realize that whenever the head or the president of any group of people says something, there will be people with ulterior motives who, if the statement suits and reinforces their own evil motives, will seize the opportunity to sensationalize the statement.

In the worst case scenario, the radiation risk in the surrounding area will increase by only 0.002 mSv and since the risk of developing cancer is 1 per 20,000 per mSv, the increased risk is 1 in 10,000,000 for people in the Kuantan area.

This chance is as good as striking the FOUR DIGIT LOTTERY 1 THOUSAND TIMES! Let me know if you know of someone who had struck the 4 digit lottery 1,000 times!

But again, consider Ng Ai Soo's comment:

" And what about other pollution and/or radiation sources in the environment before Lynas even starts. For example, a 1,000MW coal plant after just 1 year of operation produces 6,000,000 tons of CO2, 44,000 tons of SO2, 22,000 tons of NO2, 320,000 tons of ash containing 400 tons of heavy metals (arsenic, mercury, cadmium, lead etc.)

And, here’s the kicker, including 5 tons or Uranium and 12 tons of Thorium from which the radon gas of both decay chains are out the chimney and into our air... and we are building TWO of these now to add to those we already have on the peninsula. "

"In fact, the fly ash emitted by a power plant—a by-product from burning coal for electricity—carries into the surrounding environment 100 times more radiation than a nuclear power plant producing the same amount of energy." (Quote from Scientific American)

The risk of getting cancer from just 1 of the many coal fired plants in Malaysia is far, far higher than that of the Lynas plant. Pollution from all our other plants and factories are just as bad.

Why this discrimination against Lynas? Why not have a massive demonstration to call for these power plants and all our factories to be closed down and send all the waste products BACK TO AUSTRALIA, GERMANY, JAPAN, TAIWAN, ENGLAND AND THE USA.

I AN VERY SURE THAT NO SANE INVESTOR WILL COME TO MALAYSIA and we can go back to the good old times of being a 4th word country and SEND OUR DAUGHTERS AND GRAND-DAUGHTERS TO KAMPUCHEA AND MYAMMAR TO WORK AS MAIDS AND DOMESTIC SERVANTS!

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah.
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London).

hwlooi said...

Thorium-232 may not be dangerous as negligible amounts are absorbed from the gut and insignificant amount is inhaled by non-miners, but what about the dangerous accumulation of Radon gas?

Thorium-232 produces only alpha rays (gamma rays from daughter isotopes are insignificant) which cannot pass through even a thin piece of paper or the surface of the skin.
The 0.09 MeV gamma ray detected in freshly separated Thorium-232 actually comes from Radium-228, one of the daughter radionuclides from the Thorium-232 decay.

If you have a lump of pure Thorium-232, all you need to do is to wrap it up in newspaper and that will stop all the alpha radiation from getting out!

Since alpha radiation cannot go far, even if you have a huge pile of Lynas waste, the external radiation would not increase by much because only the tiny percentage of thorium-232 atoms directly on the surface of the pile will be able to radiate out their alpha particles. Those just below the surface will remain inside the pile and be converted to simple helium gas.

Since this is a case of an element which has an extremely long half life (14 billion years) and all the daughter radionuclides have relatively very short half lives (from microseconds to 6.7 years), at equilibrium, the concentration of the daughter radionuclides is very small.

Because the concentration of Thorium-232 in the Lynas waste is so low, the gamma radiation from the daughter isotopes are relatively low.

As far as radon gas is concerned, it must be remembered that Radon-220 from the decay chain of Thorium-232 has a very short half life of only 55 seconds!

As such only a tiny amount of Radon-220 (a.k.a. Thoron) within a few centimetres of the surface of a huge pile of waste will be able to live long enough to escape from the pile and see the light of day!

A lot of people have mistaken Radon-220 from Thorium-232 decay series with the more notorious Radon-222 which has a much longer half life of 3.8 days. Radon-222 comes from Uranium-238 decay series.

Because of its much longer half life, Radon-222 can and do accumulate in the cellars and poorly ventilated areas of domestic dwellings. Radon-222 is the gas that has been linked to lung cancers in especially non-smokers.

So please do not blame poor Thorium-232. It does not produce any Radon-222 and as such is not guilty of radon induced lung cancers.

The radiation of 6 Bq/gm from the weakly radioactive Thorium-232 in the Lynas waste is so low that even IAEA do not consider it significant and as such can be transported without any special permission.

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London)

*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242


http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/16/rare-earth-a-richer-malaysia-and-a-greener-world/#comment-76493

hwlooi said...

Quote: "Thorium-232 do not produce any gamma rays, but it's daughter radionuclides do produce the dangerous penetrating gamma rays" Unquote

Pure freshly separated Thorium-232 has only a slight alpha activity. There is no beta radiation and only a slight amount of gamma radiation (from the 0.09-MeV gamma rays which emanate from Th-228 decay).

However, the activity from the Th-228 side of the chain is quickly re-established. A first equilibrium state is reached in about 36 days (10 half-lives of Ra-224).

Activity then declines, as Th-228 decays faster than it is replenished by decaying Ac-228. About 3 years after separation, the activity is lower than at any other time except just after isolation.

Activity then increases until the second equilibrium state is reached in about 60 years or so.

Thorium-232 with all its daughter radionuclides

Total alpha energy = 36.2 MeV per nuclear decay
Total Gamma energy = 3.40 MeV per nuclear decay
Total Beta energy = 5.95 MeV per nuclear decay

Since the Lynas waste has 6 Bq/gm of activity, 1 KILOGRAM would have 6,000 Bq and that will produce 20,400 MeV of gamma ray energy from all the daughter radionuclides at equilibrium.

20,400 MeV from 1 kg of Lynas waste = 0.0000000007808 calories or 0.000000003268 joules.

This amount of gamma ray energy from 1 KILOGRAM of Lynas waste is not enough to tickle the backside of even a tiny little newborn caterpillar!

The total alpha energy is much larger i.e. 36.2 MeV but since alpha radiation does not pose an external threat and Thorium in clay soil is not absorbed, and since inhalation only affects miners, it is not a problem either for the Kuantan folks. But it may be a problem for those poor Australian miners in Mount Weld in Western Australia.

So, the Australians are the ones getting the wrong side of the deal!
Dust particles can get deep into the lungs only if they are very small i.e. much less than 10 micron. The particles that are less than 5 microns are the ones which can get deep into the alveoli of the lungs. Larger ones are trapped by the mucus in the nose and upper respiratory tract and are coughed out or sneezed out.

con't

hwlooi said...

con't

Particles of less than 5 microns can only be found in the Thorium and Uranium mines where powerful machines are used or where there is combustion.

Since alpha radiation cannot go far (the 4.0 MeV alpha particle from Thorium-232 decay can travel only 27.8 microns in water), even if you have a huge pile of Lynas waste, the external radiation would not increase by much because only the tiny percentage of thorium-232 atoms directly on the surface of the pile will be able to radiate out their alpha particles.

Those just below the surface will remain inside the pile and be converted to simple helium gas and those on the surface will travel only 2.54 cm into the air, picks up 2 electrons and become the harmless Helium for you to fill up your balloon.

The beta particles which are electrons (electricity = flow of electrons) do not pose an external threat either. There are lots more high voltage electrons on your clothing as static electricity when you stay in a dry air-condition room than from the waste.

Only gamma rays from your mountain of Lynas waste from less than 45 cm deep (depending on the type of soil and the water content) are able to see the light of day, as those deeper than that will be blocked by the layer of soil from getting out. And as shown above the amount of gamma rays are insignificant.

When the mother radionuclide has an extremely long half life and the daughters have very short half life, there is very little accumulation of the short half life daughters.

For instance, I did a quick calculation and found that the concentration of the daughter radionuclides is negligible e.g. there is only 1 atom of Radium 224 for every 1.4 trillion atoms of Thorium-232 at equilibrium (I stand to be corrected).

As far as radon gas is concerned, it must be remembered that Radon-220 from the decay chain of Thorium-232 has a very short half life of only 55 seconds!

As such only a tiny amount of Radon-220 (a.k.a. Thoron) within a few centimetres of the surface of a huge pile of waste will be able to live long enough to escape from the pile and see the light of day!

A lot of people have mistaken Radon-220 from Thorium-232 decay series with the more notorious Radon-222 which has a much longer half life of 3.8 days. Radon-222 comes from Uranium-238 decay series.

Because of its much longer half life, Radon-222 can and do accumulate in the cellars and poorly ventilated areas of domestic dwellings. Radon-222 is the gas that has been linked to lung cancers in especially non-smokers.

So please do not blame poor Thorium-232. It does not produce any Radon-222 and as such is not guilty of radon induced lung cancers.

SO WHAT'S THE BIG RADIATION PROBLEM?

Dr HW Looi


hwlooi said...

ADSORPTION AND SOLUBILITY


"Thorium-232 is strongly bound (adsorbed) by soil especially clay soil. The Thorium concentration in the clay particles is about 500,000 % higher than in the water between the clay particles.

So, it cannot be leached out by water and pollute the rivers. Even if the clay soil is washed into the rivers and sea it will not do any harm as the thorium will still be strongly attached (adsorbed) to the clay and will not dissolve into the water."

Quote Anti-Lynas:
"Lynas' snake-oil salesman forgot to tell you that the WLP waste will be roasted in concentrated acid. And in that form, thorium is highly soluble. Unquote

The SOLUBILITY of a substance in a solvent like water and ADSORPTION of the substance are 2 separate properties and not the same.

In nature Thorium-232 is found in the form of Monazite (Ce,La,Nd,Th)PO4 i.e. the phosphate of Thorium-232. This is completely insoluble in water.

The next most common ore is Thorite (ThSiO4) which has a gram molecular weight of 324.12 gm. This is also completely insoluble in water.

Practically most of the other thorium compounds are artificially created in the laboratory. The most famous is Thorium dioxide (ThO2) which was used as a radiological contrast media and because it is also insoluble, it is administered intravenously as a colloidal dispersion of thorium-232 dioxide (Thorotrast)

Huge doses of 25cc to 50 cc of a 25%solution of Thorium dioxide (Thorotrast) was injected into the vein or artery in the contrast radiological studies.

The other Thorium salts like the fluorides, chlorides, Iodides, sulfides, selenides, tellurides, nitrides, nitrates, sulphates and other complexes are all artificially synthesized.

All of these have varying degrees of solubility in water. The most soluble will be the nitrates, chlorides and to a lesser degree sulphates. As mentioned above, the oxides, silicates and phosphates are insoluble.

Metallic Thorium-232 is of course totally insoluble in water.

However, whether Thorium-232 is in the SOLUBLE OR INSOLUBLE FORM, IT IS STILL STRONGLY ADSORBED BY CLAY AND CANNOT BE LEACHED OUT BY WATER.

The extremely dangerous herbicide Paraquat is a liquid and is extremely soluble in water. Although it is extremely soluble and dangerous, IT IS NOT LEACHED OUT OF THE SOIL and pollute the rivers because it is STRONGLY ADSORBED BY CLAY SOIL JUST LIKE THORIUM-232.

So Lynas can continue their acid roasting of the ore and with the usual procedures taken, it should not be a problem.

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah.
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London).

hwlooi said...

Query by Anti-Lynas people:

"Thorium-232 is considered to be a carcinogen only IF ADMINISTERED INTRAVENOUSLY AS A COLLOIDAL DISPERSION OF THORIUM-232 DIOXIDE."
Dear Dr Looi, mind sharing the published full paper that made such conclusion? Also, mind clarify the word 'only if'? 'only if' under what experimental limitations, or what kind of logical algorithm?"



You can find the data in the IARC monograph when they approved the labelling of Thorium-232 as a carcinogen.

However, judging from the intellectual quality of your question, I am afraid that your basic scientific knowledge is insufficient to understand what's in the monograph.

So, I suggest you go to this wikipedia site instead.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IARC_Group_1_carcinogens


" Thorium-232 is considered to be a carcinogen only IF ADMINISTERED INTRAVENOUSLY AS A COLLOIDAL DISPERSION OF THORIUM-232 DIOXIDE."

Practically all the data on Thorium-232 and cancer comes from the intravenous injection of Thorotrast.
In the past where huge doses of 25cc to 50 cc of a 25%solution of Thorium dioxide (Thorotrast) was injected into the vein for contrast radiological studies, a very small number out of the 4 million or so patients were believed to have developed cancers 20 to 30 years later in their old age.



Part of the IARC list of Carcinogens in :


• Schistosoma haematobium (infection with)
• Silica, crystalline (inhaled in the form of quartz or cristobalite from occupational sources)
• Solar radiation
• Talc containing asbestiform fibres
• Tamoxifen5
• 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-para-dioxin
• Thiotepa (1,1',1"-Phosphinothioylidynetrisaziridine)
•Thorium-232 and its decay products, administered intravenously as a colloidal dispersion of thorium-232 dioxide
• Treosulfan
• ortho-Toluidine
• Vinyl chloride
• Ultraviolet Radiation
• X-Radiation and Gamma radiation

con't

hwlooi said...

con't

I have known about the controversy of Thorotrast (a 25 cc vial of a 25% colloidal suspension of Thorium dioxide) since I was a medical student in Manchester about 45 years ago and in fact I have been collecting a fair amount of data with regards to this contrast media.

Thorotrast was given as a contrast media via the vein and the dose of Thorium used was huge, though this depends on the type of radiological procedure done.

It had been estimated that as many as 4 million people were given this contrast in the 1930 to late 1950s.

It has been claimed that there was an increase in the incidence of cancers especially of the liver.

However, we need to consider a number of factors before we can be sure that this is the real culprit.

1) The radiation dose from those old X-ray machines in the 1930 to 1950s are hundreds of times that of the present machines.

For instance an 1896 X-ray machine was tested and found to have exposed the body to 1,500 times more radiation than modern technology does, largely because each image took 90 minutes to develop, dramatically increasing the patient's cumulative exposure to the rays. By 1930 to 1950s, the radiation dose have improved a lot but still much higher than the present X-ray machines.

Modern day X-rays require only about 21 milliseconds, and technicians place lead coverings over the body to protect vital organs from even this slight exposure.

When we do a contrast study we do not take just one X-ray, but many, sometimes more than 20 to 50.
So the patients who received the Thorotrast were subjected to a huge dose of X-rays from these antique X-ray machines.

This huge dose of X-rays may be the cause of most of the cancers, we just do not know as most of the studies are unable to assess the X-ray's dose. All these studies are done 20 to 30 years later.
So we cannot use other patients who have X-rays done in the 1930s to 1950s as a control group since most X-rays which do not need a contrast media consist of only 1 or 2 X-ray pictures.

2) The contrast studies are usually done for patients who are rather ill and may have multiple other disorders.
The cancers usually appear (as most cancers do) about 20 to 30 years later when the patients reach the "cancer" age. Because of this long lapse of cause and effect, all the studies are retrospective in nature.
And as you know, all retrospective studies are full of problems and inaccuracies.

3) A lot of these patients, have other disorders which may also lead to cancer like alcoholic cirrhosis and hepatitis B. In fact the first case of liver cancer I saw in Manchester was an old alcoholic with severe liver cirrhosis. But he also had Thorotrast contrast study more than 20 years earlier. Because of this history, the surgeon had to report him as a Thorotrast induced cancer.

4) With about 4 million by now old people, we are bound to come across a lot of cancer cases. So how many if any of these (taking into account all the above problems) are really caused by the radiation from the massive dose of intravenous Thorium-232... nobody can be really sure. If anybody says he can tell, then either he is lying or he does not know what he is saying.

Best regards,
Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah.
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London).

hwlooi said...

Response to the Learned Hon. Prof Chan's Letter in Malaysia Political Podium and Insider.


1. When Potassium is taken into the body it is not just concentrated in the muscles but concentrated in the INTRACELLULAR spaces of ALL CELLS where the cancer sensitive chromosomes are located!

So to say that Potassium concentration is less in the radiosensitive cells of the blood, lymphoid tissues, testis, ovaries and intestine is definitely not in line with basic human physiology.

It is concentrated and equally distributed in ALL INTRACELLULAR SPACES . In terms of per cell mass, it may be slightly less only in fat cells.

Intracellular Potassium = 139 to 140 mEq
Extracellular Potassium = 4 mEq which is tiny compared with the Intracellular Potassium.
Thorium-232 stays mainly in the extracellular space where it is not so harmful.

2. The data quoted by the Hon. Professor Chan must be pretty old as it still use "Curie". This unit is now practically obsolete and used only occasionally in the USA. We now use Sievert.

Anyway, curie is a measure of activity of the atoms and not the biological effects and as such CANNOT be used as a measure in a biological system as complex as the human body and on a subject that is even more complex as the causation of cancer.

3. To mention that the lifetime risk of cancer mortality per pCurie is higher in inhaled thorium-232 when compared with that of INHALED potassium is not always valid.

And it is not easy to find the heavier than lead Thorium-232 particles in the air for someone to inhale, even when near to a chemical plant like the Lynas Rare Earth Plant. You would be able to find the correct sized particles of about 1 to 2 microns in the Uranium or Thorium mines or Thorium refining plants or where there is combustion.

It sounds very impressive indeed to say that the lifetime cancer mortality risk for inhaled Thorium-232 is 200 times that of inhaled Potassium-40.
But we must know how these mortality coefficients are being calculated. For example in the case of Potassium-40:

(EPA USA) To estimate a lifetime cancer
mortality risk, if it is assumed that 100,000 people
were continuously exposed to a thick layer of soil
with an initial average concentration of 1 pCi/g
potassium-40, then 4 of these 100,000 people
would be predicted to incur a fatal cancer over
their lifetime.

Why not 40, or 80, or 800 or 8,000 or 80,000 of these 100,000 people would be predicted to incur a fatal cancer over their lifetime!

Any good mathematician would tell you that when an assumption is put into a mathematical equation, the result would be just RUBBISH!

The radiation of 6 Bq/gm from the weakly radioactive Thorium-232 in the Lynas waste is so low that even IAEA do not consider it significant and as such can be transported without any special permission.

Moreover, Thorium-232 is not a Carcinogen (cancer causing agent) if Inhaled or Ingested according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer IARC.

Thorium-232 is considered to be a carcinogen only IF ADMINISTERED INTRAVENOUSLY AS A COLLOIDAL DISPERSION OF THORIUM-232 DIOXIDE.

cont.

hwlooi said...

cont.

It was claimed that a 20 year study in one of the largest rare earth mine, the Bayun Obo mine has shown that inhalation Thorium has proven to cause lung cancer. The number of miners in 2001 were 6,983 of which 3016 were exposed to dense dust in the mine.

After correcting for the heavy smoking, there was an excess of 10 cases of lung cancer in workers who had worked for about 30 years or so in the mine.

But this study cannot exclude crystalline silica (SiO2) in the dust as being the cause of the lung cancers. Silica is a confirmed carcinogen while Thorium by inhalation or ingestion is not.

cont.

AND MOREOVER, KUANTAN PEOPLE ARE NOT RARE EARTH OR THORIUM MINERS!

The rare earth miners in the case of the Lynas Rare Earth Plant are still in a place called Mount Weld in Western Australia!

If there is any long term lung problem, the Australians are the ones who will be getting those problems and not the Kuantan people.

Kuantan people are just ordinary traders, office workers, taxi drivers or just hanging around doing nothing in the air-conditioned malls.

It is tantamount to claiming that since workers in the granite quarries and underground tin mines developed severe lung disease (silicosis) and lung cancer from inhaling dust containing silica (sand), the millions of tons of sand in our beaches should be relocated to somewhere safe or shipped back to...?Australia.

Definite evidence that crystalline silica (Sand, Sio2) is associated with an increased rate of lung cancer led the International Agency for Research on
Cancer (IARC) to conclude in 1997 that crystalline silica is a known human
carcinogen.

There is also a fear that the waste will be dumped all over the place. Unfortunately, this risk also apply to all our factories and plants. Should we demand that all our factories and plants to be closed down so that we can go back to the good old days of tapping rubber and plucking coconut for the BIG WHITE MAN?

cont.

hwlooi said...

cont.

In his article the Hon. Professor have conveniently excluded the following and that may distort the true picture.

1) The British study (COMARE) published in 2010 clearly showed that there is no increase in the number of leukaemia cases in young children living near nuclear power plants.

This study which covers a period of over 35 years is far more comprehensive than the French study which covers only a period of 5 years.
The research, conducted by scientists on the Committee of the Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment (COMARE), found only 20 cases of childhood leukaemia within 5 km (3.1 miles) of nuclear power stations between 1969 and 2004.
The rate was virtually the same as in areas where there were no nuclear plants.
A study on Germany, published in 2007, did find a significantly increased risk, but the COMARE team said these findings were probably influenced by an unexplained leukaemia cluster near a nuclear plant in Krummel, north Germany, that lasted from 1990 to 2005.
Excluding Krummel, evidence for an increased leukaemia risk among young children living close to German nuclear power plants was "extremely weak", it said.
The French study found that between 2002 and 2007 (only 5 years), 14 children under the age of 15 living in a 5-kilometre radius of France's 19 nuclear power plants had been diagnosed with leukaemia.

This number of cases (14 in 5 years) are so small that even a small unaccounted unknown factor would lead to a false statistical result.

2) Nuclear plants are so well shielded that there is no increase in the radiation level outside the plant.
The only type of "radiation" which cannot be shielded are the neutrinos which are created in great numbers in the nuclear reactors. But we must remember that Trillions upon Trillions of neutrinos from the sun and other sources pass through our bodies every second !

3) The Lynas plant is not a nuclear power plant and trying to compare findings from an nuclear plant to that of an ordinary chemical plant is like trying to compare an elephant with a caterpillar !

4) To imply that there is no safe level of radiation is like saying that there is no safe level of bacteria and other micro-organisms in the human body.... without realising that 90% of the living cells in the human body are micro-organisms. And without these micro-organisms we would not be able to stay healthy for long.

There is now more and more evidence to suggest that we need a certain amount of radiation to stimulate our immune system in order to stay healthy.


Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London)

hwlooi said...

Quoted from Ng Ai Soo response to the Hon. Prof. Chan 's article in the Malaysian Political Podium and Insider:


Quoted from Ng Ai Soo's response to the Hon. Prof. Chan's Article.


"The inverse square law applies to trillions and trillions of particles, not just the one particle. That one particle IS the radiation only "dilutes" in a quantum sense... it otherwise remains one particle no matter how far it is from the source... so the cellular damage by that one particle is the same, no matter how far it travelled to get into the cell. But it must survive that journey into the cell and for different particles the survival rates are different.

The "precautionary principle" has to be used judiciously... overuse can lead to awkward situations. For example, the other day a football player collapsed and very nearly died mid-game, therefore nobody should play football... never mind rugby! More than a million people die on the roads worldwide each year, therefore nobody should use roads... to say nothing about air travel. The use of coal results in fatalities not only in mining, but also due to emissions... therefore we should not use coal. So where do you draw the line.

The methods used to get such high damage estimates from radiation, if applied to other sources, can also lead to silly results. For example, if applied to air travel (high altitude leads to higher radiation) such methods will give hundreds, if not, thousands of casualties.

As pointed out by Dr. Looi, people have lived very healthy lives for many, many generations in Ramsar despite (or because of?!) a background of more that 100mSv/yr... likewise in Kerala where the background exceeds 50mSv/yr... apply the extreme methods to these people and you will find thousands of expected radiation casualties over the millennia, not to say mutations and such... but the people have been and are all healthy if not better than average.

Nuclear power stations cannot be constructed in Cornwall because the natural background radiation is about 8mSv/yr.

Why are there no cancer clusters there? You put it best when you say "excess childhood leukaemia near nuclear power plants that can’t be explained by radiation exposures which are much below the “safe thresholds”"... that is, they are not caused by radiation exposure from the nuclear power stations.

In fact such clusters occur in other places as well, nowhere near nuclear power stations, and in one case, a cluster was found at a site at which a nuclear power station was planned but not yet built!

cont.

hwlooi said...

cont.

Of course what happened at Cerrie is well known (see http://iopscience.iop.org/0952-4746/24/4/E02/pdf/jr44e1.pdf , http://www.cerrie.org/ and http://www.comare.org.uk which advises the UK government) and is due to two members, one of whom is Christopher Busby who, it seems, sells radiation protection kits to Fukushima survivors (see http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/21/christopher-busby-radiation-pills-fukushima and

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/nov/22/christopher-busby-nuclear-green-party ).

Busby is very political and even ran for office. Please advise all that protection has to be sought for exposure to Busby emissions, if nothing else, from his reported profanity.

And what about other pollution and/or radiation sources in the environment before Lynas even starts.

For example, a 1,000MW coal plant after just 1 year of operation produces 6,000,000 tons of CO2, 44,000 tons of SO2, 22,000 tons of NO2, 320,000 tons of ash containing 400 tons of heavy metals (arsenic, mercury, cadmium, lead etc.) and, here’s the kicker, including 5 tons of Uranium and 12 tons of Thorium from which the radon gas of both decay chains are out the chimney and into our air... and we are building TWO of these now to add to those we already have on the peninsula. Where do we store this waste?

Does this waste go into making our roads or construction material? What is Lynas waste in comparison?!

How did we manage to put up with that yearly radioactive and toxic waste, and plan to build more of the same, with no objection from you?

Be fair... if you want to protect us from industrial radiation pollution, then tackle the whole lot of them in proportion to their pollution, not just Lynas.

Dr. Looi's presentation of the facts is clear and persuasive compared with the unnecessary fear, uncertainty and doubt that taints your article."


Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London)
*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/16/rare-earth-a-richer-malaysia-and-a-greener-world/#comment-76493

hwlooi said...

The Hon Prof. Chan :

Quote from the Hon. Professor "...childhood leukaemias observed among the children of Bukit Merah? (Recall also the inverse square law — the intensity of radiation from a radioactive particle a metre away from a human body increases a trillion-fold when that same particle sits at micron-level distances on the body’s cells and tissues.)

Reply by Ng Ai Soo

"The inverse square law applies to trillions and trillions of particles, not just the one particle. That one particle IS the radiation only "dilutes" in a quantum sense... it otherwise remains one particle no matter how far it is from the source... so the cellular damage by that one particle is the same, no matter how far it travelled to get into the cell. But it must survive that journey into the cell and for different particles the survival rates are different.

The Hon. Prof. Chan

A quick response to Ng Ai Soo (?): I’m referring to macroscopic radioactive particles (e.g. thorium-containing dusts), not to a radioactive atomic nucleus nor sub-atomic particles.

Comment by Me.

1. In addition to the clarification by Ng Ai Soo of the inappropriateness in invoking the inverse square law to just one particle, if we assume that the intensity is increased by a trillion fold, an alpha particle from Thorium-232 with an energy of 4 MeV is magnified by a factor of 1 trillion, the energy would be 0.64 Joules and this is so "intense" that all the cells that are hit, will be vaporized. We know that DEAD cells do not and cannot turn into cancer cells!

2. Even if we are referring to thorium-containing dusts in Bukit Merah and "not to a radioactive atomic nucleus nor sub-atomic particles,"
it would not work either because at 1 metre away, alpha particles from the Thorium-232 can travel about a couple of centimetres, and since the cells are subjected to an intensity of radiation at 1 metre = 0 units.
Therefore at micron level, 0 multiplied by 1 Trillion is still = 0 units

This shows that if we use retrograde calculations in these situations, we can end up with some rather embarrassing results.

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London)

hwlooi said...

Quoted: Jonathan Fun Response to Hon. Prof Chan in Insider

"I read with great interest the debate and evidences shown by both sides.

While acknowledging Prof. Chan's arguments, doubts, concerns, and counter-evidences on the effects of Thorium, I must agree with Datuk Dr. Looi and Ng Ai Soo's points in what I'd like to call "Selective Rejection".

We all know the effects of Thorium to our health through the inhalation route; microscopic thorium dusts entering our bloodstream, majority of those amounts will be deposited in our bone marrows and stays there for the next 22 years, emitting alpha radiation, increasing risks to cancer, etc.

But again, consider Ng Ai Soo's comment from Chan's previous article :

" And what about other pollution and/or radiation sources in the environment before Lynas even starts. For example, a 1,000MW coal plant after just 1 year of operation produces 6,000,000 tons of CO2, 44,000 tons of SO2, 22,000 tons of NO2, 320,000 tons of ash containing 400 tons of heavy metals (arsenic, mercury, cadmium, lead etc.)

And, here’s the kicker, including 5 tons of Uranium and 12 tons of Thorium from which the radon gas of both decay chains are out the chimney and into our air... and we are building TWO of these now to add to those we already have on the peninsula.

Where do we store this waste? Does this waste go into making our roads or construction material? What is Lynas waste in comparison?! How did we manage to put up with that yearly radioactive and toxic waste, and plan to build more of the same, with no objection from you?

Be fair... if you want to protect us from industrial radiation pollution, then tackle the whole lot of them in proportion to their pollution, not just Lynas. Dr. Looi's presentation of the facts is clear and persuasive compared with the unnecessary fear, uncertainty and doubt that taints your article in reply to him. "

The keyword here IMHO is "Uncertainty", which brings us back to the discussion of the "Precautionary Principle".

There is nothing wrong being doubtful of the effects of Thorium, hence rejecting it, and there is nothing wrong being confident that Thorium wastes that will be produced by Lynas if they are given the green light to operate, are going to be safe, given the scientific facts that proves it.

But what I'd like to implore those hardcore Anti-Lynas/Anti-Rare Earth/Anti-Whatever friends out there to understand, is that when we make a stand, it must be based on a principle, and for the stand to be credible and fair, it must be applied across the board.

So we know iron/copper mines also produces not just Thorium, but Radium and Uranium wastes too.

And we know rock phosphate fertilizer production facilities also produces not just Thorium, but Radium and Uranium wastes too.

Hence, if the reason we are all so head over heals about throwing Lynas out of our shores is because of the potential hazards of Thorium, or the uncertainty that Thorium will be safe, then let our will be done. Reject Lynas. Get them out of the country. Shoo.

But we can't let existing industries which are also producing Thorium wastes, like iron/copper mines and fertilizer plants, to continue operating as well. Reject any industry that produces Thorium wastes. Get them out of the country. Shoo.

Can we all agree on this stand? Else going all out to reject Lynas while allowing existing industries that also produces Thorium wastes to continue operation is just plain hypocritical."

Dato' Dr Looi

hwlooi said...

Members of the anti-lynas crowd have been asking some very childish and ridiculous questions (repeatedly parroted more as a means of cyber harassment than for any form of intellectual benefit).

Some of the best examples are:

1. If you think it is so safe why don't you eat it?

Answer: Since my cooked SH*T IS ALSO SAFE, would YOU like to eat it?

(What I mean is that if something is safe or not radioactive, it does not necessarily mean that you have to eat it!)

This chain question probably started when one of the young, inexperienced politicians asked another to drink drain water and since then this question has been brainlessly parroted by some of his followers.

2. If you think it is so safe, why don't you put it in your fridge?

Answer: Since my cooked SH*T IS ALSO SAFE, why don't YOU put it in YOUR fridge?

3. If you think there is no radioactivity why don't you live next to the Lynas plant?

Answer (Short answer. If you want a longer answer, please refer to my posts in other blogs):

A pigs farm or even a huge oil palm factory also do not have any significant radioactivity, so why don't you live next to it?

4. Can you guarantee me that the Lynas plant is 100% safe

Answer: AND AS FAR AS THE 100% BUSINESS IS CONCERNED, THE ONLY THING IN LIFE WHICH WE CAN BE A 100% SURE OF IS THE CEMETERY AND THE LAVATORY. IF WE HAVE TO GO, WE HAVE TO GO 100%.

5. THE MOTHER OF ALL SILLY QUESTIONS, asked by an accountant in Anti-Lynas crowd.

Do you know the difference between

1 sodium metal in the lab and sodium ion in sea water?
2 iron metal power, iron oxide powder, iron salt ions?
3 lead metal , lead oxide , lead ions of the heavy metal ?
4 thorium metal powder, thorium hydroxide and rare earth waste thorium ions as heavy metallic ions ?

ANSWER:

IF YOU CAN ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS,
I THINK I MIGHT TAKE SOME LSD AND PROCEED TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU ASKED ABOVE.

Do you know the difference between

1 black hair on your head and brown hair in my toilet?
2 telekom power, purple coffee powder, blue curry powder?
3 coconut husk, coconut roots, coconut leaves of tall Angsana trees?
4 arsenic tetrahydrococonut, arsenic monodurian, and arsenic as rare earth waste thorium non-ionic as heavy metallic non-submersible non-iron ironic nano-ions nonsense?

The list of infantile unintelligent questions goes on and on and on.

All these continuously repeated and parroted non-physical questions and statements will not serve the anti-lynas objective but only characterise the anti-lynas folk as childish, non-thinking ill-informed people with IQs which I would rather not mention!

Dato' Dr Looi

hwlooi said...

ANSWER TO C.K. (SELF-STYLED NUCLEAR SCIENTIST AFFILIATED WITH CERN) WHO CLAIMED THAT IN PLACES WITH HIGH ENVIRONMENTAL RADIATION LIKE RAMSAR, THE INHABITANTS DO NOT SUFFER ANY ILL EFFECT BECAUSE OF ADAPTATION, FOR EXAMPLE THE CASE OF CHERNOBYL RAPID ADAPTATION TAKES PLACE AMONG THE “LIQUIDATORS”.


Quote “the writer has forgotten the glaring fact that those inhabitants in these locations have gone through generations of adaptations “. Unquote

REPLY: This I feel is a gross simplification of the situation. As you should know for a useful mutation to take place under a selective pressure like radiation we need the presence of millions upon millions of reproductive events.

Those individuals without this useful mutation must be selectively eliminated through death or inability to reproduce.

Deaths and infertility have not been a known side effect of the slow, low level radiation seen in Ramsar where the average radiation, though higher than other places, are still way below the lethal level. The average radiation level is only 10 mSv per year, though in some areas it may be as high as 260 mSv/yr.

Humans are not like bacteria or viruses where millions or even billions of individual organisms are involved and where there is a generation change within about 20 minutes or so.

In Ramsar, for instance the population in 2006 is only 31,000.
In terms of useful mutation that can be transmitted to the whole population to materialise, the chance of such a mutation must be incredibly small for such a genetically tiny non-isolated population.

Those 31,000 people over the years must have moved freely to and from other parts of Iran.

For a tiny population and where the reproductive cycle is in terms of 20 years or so the number of generations must run into thousands or even more.

Moreover, Ramsar is not an isolated island, but rather part of an easily accessible area of Iran where there are frequent movement of people and genetic material.

As such, for that one incredible rare mutation providing resistance to radiation to be transmitted to whole non-static population is near impossible, especially when that one mutant needs to impregnate and transmit this useful gene to a whole non-static population. He must be a real SUPERMAN!

The example of radiation accident at Chernobyl where 30 people lost their lives as a result of acute radiation syndrome is a rather poor example to explain the development of genetically transmitted radiation tolerance.

The exposure was very acute and at a very high dose, at levels of about 100 mSv over a very short time. These are highly lethal doses and as such should obviously cause a certain number of deaths, just like any other toxin or chemical where not all that are exposed will die and as such we have such a statistical value called LD50.

cont.

hwlooi said...

given 150 tablets of panadol at only 5 tablets per day in divided doses, this is no longer a form of selection pressure as the dosage though high is well below the danger threshold and will not cause any death from liver failure.

The average dose of radiation received by people in Ramsar is about 10 milisievert/year, though in some cases can reach a level in excess of 260 milisievert/year.

This radiation level of 10 mSv/year is like taking 150 tablets of panadol at 5 tablets per day in divided doses. At this low level it is not a significant evolutional selection pressure as it is way below a level which can cause rapid evolutional changes.

The scientist also claimed that the radiation is cumulative and as such do exert a selective pressure on the population of e.g. Ramsar.
However, this scientist do not realise that if it is cumulative in nature, it therefore does not kill the people within a short period.

What this suggest is that, if that is true, it will only cause death from cancer 10 to 30 years later WELL AFTER THE REPRODUCTIVE AGE OF THE PEOPLE AND AS SUCH WILL NOT HAVE ANY ILL EFFECT ON THE SURVIVAL OF THE POPULATION AS A WHOLE i.e. the moderately high level of radiation is not an evolutional selective pressure on the population.


Dato’ Dr Looi Hoong Wah.
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London).

hwlooi said...

ANSWER TO C.K. (SELF-STYLED NUCLEAR SCIENTIST AFFILIATED WITH CERN) who claimed that the actual casualties from Chernobyl is MUCH higher than what establishment acknowledges and may actually run into the thousands.

My reply:

I am aware of the claims that thousands upon thousands of the liquidators (clean-up workers) have died but you must remember that there was a total of well over 700,000 liquidators.

The male life expectancy in Russia in 1999 was only 58 years. The accident happened in 1986 i.e. 26 years ago and so all those who were above 32 years old at that time (58 minus 26 years) have already exceeded their normal life expectancy. The average age of the early liquidators were between 20 and 45 years.

So out of the 700,000 people probably a few hundred thousand must have exceeded their life expectance by now and it is not unexpected to find thousands of these people have died by now from causes other than radiation. An UNSCEAR report places the total confirmed deaths from radiation at 64 as of 2008.

Quote from IAEA: “Emergency workers or “liquidators” were drafted into the area and helped to clean up the plant premises and the surrounding area.

These workers, generally men aged 20 to 45, were mostly plant employees, Ukrainian fire-fighters plus many soldiers and miners from Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and other parts of the then Soviet Union.
Within the first three months, the group known as the “Early Liquidators”, those first on the scene including plant workers, construction workers and local fire-fighters, lost 28 members to Acute Radiation Sickness.

Another 106 persons were treated for the same disease and survived. Nineteen additional patients died over the eight years following the accident, although these were not necessarily associated with radiation exposure

Some 350,000 people involved in the initial clean-up of the plant in 1986-87 received average total body radiation doses of the order of 100 millisieverts (mSv) – a millisievert is a unit of radiation dose equivalent to about 10 general chest x-rays.

This dose is about five times the maximum annual dose limit currently permitted for workers in nuclear facilities (20 mSv per year). Average worldwide natural “background” radiation is about 2.4 mSv annually.” Unquote

What I am trying to say is that it is not valid to use the results of the ACUTE HIGH INTENSITY radiation (100 mSv) of Chernobyl to justify evolutionary changes in the chronic low intensity (about 10 mSv/year) radiation found in places like Ramsay.

Dato’ Dr Looi Hoong Wah.
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London).
*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242

hwlooi said...

An anti-Lynas foot soldier by the name of Jin claimed that Thorium-232 adsorbed by clay can be easily leached out by the natural humic acid as evidenced by this research paper:

http://www.aseanenvironment.info/Abstract/41001316.pdf.

Quote anti-Lynas "quick Google scholar search gave me this research paper, which got my attention: "Evidence for radionuclide transport and mobilization in a shallow, sandy aquifer". The adsorption of Thorium to clay mentioned by you can be 'dissolved' by natural humic/fulvic acid shown by manipulated experiment in real natural environment, and hence, leaching is possible. At least, in theory. Now this is not something I fabricated, it is from a research paper published in a well respected journal." Unquote.

The paper which is titled: " Evidence for Radionuclide Transport and Mobilization in a Shallow, Sandy Aquifer"

clearly states "SANDY AQUIFER" and definitely not "CLAY AQUIFER" .

THORIUM-232 IS ADSORBED BY CLAY AND NOT BY SAND.

Even the authors of this research stated unequivocally that "The
source of this increase in radionuclide concentrations must
therefore be the AQUIFER SANDS (see Table 11)

Was humic/fulvic acid injected into clay soil mentioned in any part of the paper?

The answer is an absolute NO! The paper was well researched and well written but was BADLY MISINTERPRETED BY SOMEONE WHO DO NOT HAVE THE INTELLIGENCE AND BASIC KNOWLEDGE TO READ SUCH PAPERS.

I repeat THORIUM-232 IS STRONGLY ADSORBED BY CLAY AND THORIUM-232 IS NOT ADSORBED BY SAND.

For the information of the anti-lynas camp, sand or crystalline silica (SiO2) is also classified by IARC as a group 1 carcinogen i.e. a definite cancer causing substance.

Being so fearful of carcinogens they should stage a huge demonstration to insist that all the sand in our beaches be dug out and sent to Singapore where the people are more intelligent and less ignorant and are more capable of appreciating this carcinogen called SAND!

This well written research paper does not show that Thorium-232 is easily leached by humic acid from clay soil.

What it does show up is the ignorance of certain people who are intransigently, irreversibly and irrevocably ADSORBED to self inflicted IGNORANCE.

A LITTLE KNOWLEDGE IN THE HANDS OF THE IGNORANT IS A VERY DANGEROUS THING!

To the anti-Lynas people, do not ask me for reference to any scientific data when the whole lot of you cannot understand and properly analyse even simple scientific papers.

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah.
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London).

hwlooi said...

The anti-Lynas people who are so paranoid about imported radiation from Australia should have a look at this paper published in the Malaysian Journal of Analytical Sciences which showed that the level of radiation in areas where tin was mined. The waste or amang contains high levels of Monazite and other minerals which are highly radioactive.

All these old tin mine areas are well populated. Note even Kuala Lumpur is also an ex-tin mining area.

This study was done in Kg Gagah in Perak :

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:CsxxK6PTXGwJ:www.ukm.my/mjas/v12_n2/zaini%2520hamzah.pdf+concentration+of+thorium+in+malaysian+soil&hl=en&gl=my&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESi6dZOSD4j7m0JTW7CTVJRQoPlLPaLvlj0TlmGH81bgfv0iz6olM8A-TDVl5RJ7UThRG8OV7jJm1uj6C2sF2Xz1ip1oJTrPv5P2X7KbAoRXPQj1LTi16cmTfwjL8g6IVJlQCRE-&sig=AHIEtbQN1IoA3JZOvIjgUhbxyO45iKlDcw&pli=1

Quote: " The level of surface dose varies from one location to another, but there is a critical area which has a significantly high surface dose approaching 30 microSv/hr " Unquote

30 microSv/hr is about 260 mSv/year or about the same level as the highest recorded area in Ramsar!.

So in the paranoid minds of the anti-Lynas people they should either

1. Dig out all the soil in all the ex-tin mining areas in Malaysia which include the whole of the Kinta Valley and practically the Whole of the state of Selangor and send that to Australia. Or

2. All of them swim to Australia and claim refugee status (Refugees from imagined Radiation Danger).

I do not have any data on the ex-Sungai Lembing Tin mine. This was the world's largest and deepest underground tin mine and the radiation level must be significantly high especially right inside the mine.

As such the anti-Lynas diehards of Kuantan should also swim to Australia and beg for forgiveness for wrongly "Fukushimizing" the Lynas Plant and hope that they will be accepted as Radiation Refugees!

Dato’ Dr Looi

hwlooi said...

Comparison of Radioactivity in Bq (Specific Activity: number of atoms decaying in 1second)

Pure freshly separated Thorium-232 = 4,080 Bq/gm

Pure Potassium-40 = 254,000 Bq/gm

Naturally Occurring Potassium (3 different isotopes) in our body and food =
31.825 Bq/gm

Artificially created Plutonium-238 = 634,000,000,000 Bq/gm (1/2 life=87.7 yr)

Malaysian Monazite Ore from Amang or Tin Slag = 284 Bq/gm

Lynas Rare Earth Waste = 6 Bq/gm

Thorium in Average American Soil = 6 ppm (parts per million)

Thorium in Average Malaysian Soil = 20 ppm (parts per million)

It has been estimated that in the worst case scenario, the radiation risk from the Lynas plant within a radius of 1 km is only 0.002 mSv/yr.

In Ramsar, Iran, the naturally occurring radiation
is extremely high at 260 mSv/yr. This is 13,000,000% higher than the expected worse case scenario in Kuantan.


Dosage in Biological Effect in mSv.

Sleeping next to someone for 8 hours daily = 0.02 mSv/yr (10x Lynas worst
case)

Sleeping in wooden house = 0.20 mSv/yr (100x Lynas worst case)

Smoking a pack of cigarettes daily 0.20 mSv/yr (100x Lynas worst case)

Slag brick and granite house = up to 2.0 mSv/yr (1,000x Lynas worst case)

Chest X-ray = 0.10 mSv

Medical or dental X-ray 0.39 mSv

CT Scan (Chest) = 10 mSv

CT Fluoroscopy of abdomen and pelvis 6 to 90 mSv (median=31 mSv)


(Source: UNSCEAR and EPA and IAEA)

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah.
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London).

*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242


http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/16/rare-earth-a-richer-malaysia-and-a-greener-world/#comment-76493

hwlooi said...

What is the "safe" level of radiation?


Public dose limits for exposure from uranium mining or nuclear plants are usually set at 1 mSv per year above background.

According to the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement (NCRP) and its international counterpart, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). Both of these organizations offer recommendations for the maximum permissible dose (MPD) of radiation.

General Public annual MPD by both NCRP and ICRP is 1 mSv.

For Radiation Workers, the annual MPD is 50 mSv (NCRP) and 20 mSv (ICRP), with a cumulative MPD of 10 mSv x Age.

MPD during pregnancy is 5 mSv (NCRP) and 2 mSv (ICRP).

HOWEVER, EXPERTS INCLUDING Professor WADE ALLISON OF OXFORD UNIVERSITY ARGUE THAT THE DOSE LIMIT CAN SAFELY BE RAISED TO 100 mSv, based on current health statistics.

Compare this with the dose of 0.002 millisieverts/year of exposure for people living within 1 km of the Lynas plant in the worst case scenario (estimated by Lynas).

This level of 0.002 mSv/yr is actually grossly overestimated because the low energy gamma rays from the Thorium-232 decay chain is able to travel less than 300 metres in air.

Note, the average energy of most abundant emission is only 0.059 MeV, though the gamma ray from Thallium-208 decay to stable Lead-208 has a higher energy of 2.62 MeV.

The radon-220 has a very short half life of only 55 seconds and as such cannot travel far and do not accumulate in confined spaces like the radon-222 from the Uranium decay series.

So the actual radiation dose at a distance greater than 300 metres from the plant is approaching 0 mSv/year !

Comparative Dosages in Biological Effect in mSv.

Dose from natural radiation in the human body: 0.40 mSv per year

Sleeping next to someone for 8 hours daily = 0.02 mSv/yr (10x Lynas worst case)

Sleeping in wooden house = 0.20 mSv/yr (100x Lynas worst case)

Smoking a pack of cigarettes daily 0.20 mSv/yr (100x Lynas worst case)

Slag brick and granite house = up to 2.0 mSv/yr (1,000x Lynas worst case)

Chest X-ray = 0.10 mSv

Medical or dental X-ray 0.39 mSv

CT Scan (Chest) = 10 mSv

CT Fluoroscopy of abdomen and pelvis 6 to 90 mSv (median=31 mSv)

Average individual background radiation dose: 2 mSv per year (1.5 mSv per

year for Australians and 3.0 mSv per year for Americans)

Dose from atmospheric sources (mostly radon): 2 mSv per year

Total average radiation dose for Americans: 6.2 mSv per year

Current average dose limit for nuclear workers: 20 mSv per year

Dose from background radiation in parts of Iran, India and Europe: 50 mSv per year

(Source: UNSCEAR and EPA and IAEA)

hwlooi said...

cont

All the potassium that we eat everyday in our food contains potassium-40 and the normal dietary potassium would give a total of about 80 Bq per day.
Compare this with the Lynas waste which produces only 6 Bq/gm

Even your wife or husband is radioactive, with a radioactivity of 4,000 Bq from Potassium-40 and another 3,000 Bq from Carbon-14 giving a total of about 7,000 Bq!

Sleeping next to someone (i.e. your wife or husband) for 8 hours a day will lead to an exposure of 0.02 mSv/year (Source: UNSCEAR and EPA).

Since all living cells contain potassium, all types of meat, flesh, fruits, nuts and vegetables are radioactive because of the potassium-40 content.

The so-called sodium free salt recommended by health experts to combat high blood pressure is nothing more than just highly radioactive potassium salt! Even a lot of doctors, specialists and professors do not know this!

The message here is that more radioactive substances are freely sold in the shops and used as a fertilizer or eaten by us than you would otherwise thought.

Dr. Gary H. Kramer, who is the Head of the National Internal Radiation Assessment Section at Health Canada:

“Potassium chloride can be found in large quantities in stores selling materials for water treatment. The potassium content is about 500 g kg-
Typically, the material is sold in 20 kg bags so each bag contains ~600 kBq of 40K giving a concentration of 30 Bq g-1. This is well above the exclusion level yet the material is handled as non-radioactive. The external dose rate in close proximity to a typical display in these types of shops would be about 150 microSv hr-1.
A worker would only need to be near the pile for about 7 hours to exceed the public dose limit of 1 mSv.”

Quote: Nick Tsurikov, radiation safety expert:

" In most countries, the current maximum permissible dose to radiation workers is 20 mSv per year averaged over five years, with a maximum of 50 mSv in any one year.

This is over and above background exposure, and excludes medical exposure. The value originates from the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), and is coupled with the requirement to keep exposure as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) — taking into account social and economic factors." Unquote.

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah.
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London).

hwlooi said...

CERRIE Minority Report and European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR)

The anti-lynas group (including the good Hon. Professor C.) has often used the CERRIE Minority Report to claim that "There is strong evidence that current models of hazard from radioactivity inside the human body underestimate risks by at least 100 and possibly up to 1,000 times."

What happened at CERRIE (Committee Examining Radiation Risks of Internal Emitters) is well known (see http://iopscience.iop.org/0952-4746/24/4/E02/pdf/jr44e1.pdf , http://www.cerrie.org/ and

http://www.comare.org.uk/ which advises the UK government) and is due to two members, one of whom is Christopher Busby who, it seems, sells radiation protection kits to Fukushima survivors

(see http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/21/christopher-busby-radiation-pills-fukushima and

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/nov/22/christopher-busby-nuclear-green-party ). Busby is very political and even ran for office.

They also cited that the self-styled European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR) which is an informal committee formed in 1997 following a meeting by the European Green Party which claimed that the risk from radioactive internal emitters are at least 100 to 200 times more hazardous than currently believed.

Quote: Nick Tsurikov, Radiation Safety Expert "The point that I would like to make is to illustrate clearly that ECRR "100-200 times" factors cannot possibly be correct - have a look:

The 'official' risk of getting cancer from radiation exposure is 1 in 20,000 per 1 milliSievert of dose. So, if the hazard is 'understated' by, say, 200 times - it becomes 1 in 100, per 1 mSv of dose.

Thousands of people in Malaysian amang industry and in heavy mineral sands industry world-wide have been exposed to about 5 mSv every year for (let's say, on average) 6 years of working life, so their cumulative dose was 30 mSv.

WHICH MEANS THAT IF ECRR IS CORRECT, EVERY THIRD WORKER IN THE AMANG INDUSTRY WOULD BE DEAD FROM CANCER BY NOW !

And what about those who were exposed to about 20 mSv for five years or more (in any industry, uranium included) - in accordance with the ECRR coefficients - the chance is 1 in 1, so they are all dead from cancer by now...

I do not see any cancer epidemic happening... What about all the tin miners in Malaysia in 1950's-1970's: they all should've died within several years after starting their work (as their coefficient would be close to 5 to 1...) Just some points for general consideration..." Unquote.

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London)
*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242

hwlooi said...

Quote the good old learned Hon. Prof. Chan:

" The “safe thresholds” of 1 mSv/yr (public) and 20 mSv/yr (occupational) that Dr Looi, Dr Che Rosli Che Mat (MP, Hulu Langat), Lynas, AELB, and IAEA repeatedly invoke are derived from ICRP risk models which are currently under critical scrutiny and challenge, in the wake of excess childhood leukaemia near nuclear power plants that can’t be explained by radiation exposures which are much below the “safe thresholds”. A UK expert panel for instance (2004, www.cerrie.org) could not arrive at a consensus regarding the health risks of low-level exposure to internal emitters (inhaled or ingested radioactive particles). Opinions among the UK panel members ranged from negligible adverse effects to an underestimation of risk by at least a 100-fold. Unquote.

However, experts including Professor Wade Allison of Oxford University argue that the dose limit can safely be raised to 100 millisieverts, based on current health statistics.

CERRIE Minority Report and European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR)

The anti-lynas group (including the good Hon. Professor C.) has often used the CERRIE Minority Report to claim that "There is strong evidence that current models of hazard from radioactivity inside the human body underestimate risks by at least 100 and possibly up to 1,000 times."

What happened at CERRIE (Committee Examining Radiation Risks of Internal Emitters) is well known (see http://iopscience.iop.org/0952-4746/24/4/E02/pdf/jr44e1.pdf , http://www.cerrie.org/ and

http://www.comare.org.uk/ which advises the UK government) and is due to two members, one of whom is Christopher Busby who, it seems, sells radiation protection kits to Fukushima survivors

(see http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/21/christopher-busby-radiation-pills-fukushima and

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/nov/22/christopher-busby-nuclear-green-party ). Busby is very political and even ran for office.

They also cited that the self-styled European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR) which is an informal committee formed in 1997 following a meeting by the European Green Party which claimed that the risk from radioactive internal emitters are at least 100 to 200 times more hazardous than currently believed.

Quote: Nick Tsurikov "The point that I would like to make is to illustrate clearly that ECRR "100-200 times" factors cannot possibly be correct - have a look:

The 'official' risk of getting cancer from radiation exposure is 1 in 20,000 per 1 milliSievert of dose. So, if the hazard is 'understated' by, say, 200 times - it becomes 1 in 100, per 1 mSv of dose.

Thousands of people in Malaysian amang industry and in heavy mineral sands industry world wide have been exposed to about 5 mSv every year for (let's say, on average) 6 years of working life, so their cumulative dose was 30 mSv.

WHICH MEANS THAT IF ECRR IS CORRECT, EVERY THIRD WORKER IN THE AMANG INDUSTRY WOULD BE DEAD FROM CANCER BY NOW !

And what about those who were exposed to about 20 mSv for five years or more (in any industry, uranium included) - in accordance with the ECRR coefficients - the chance is 1 in 1, so they are all dead from cancer by now...

I do not see any cancer epidemic happening... What about all the tin miners in Malaysia in 1950's-1970's: they all should've died within several years after starting their work (as their coefficient would be close to 5 to 1...) Just some points for general consideration..." Unquote.

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London)
*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/16/rare-earth-a-richer-malaysia-and-a-greener-world/#comment-76493


hwlooi said...

From the New Straits Times Press, Ahmad Ibrahim, Fellow of Academy of Sciences, Malaysia Quote:

"La Rochelle, the 'Lynas of France"

Many would be surprised that La Rochelle has for decades been hosting a rare earths processing plant, similar to the one planned in Malaysia.

The La Rochelle facility, which belongs to France's Rhodia Group, has for years been operating like Lynas. Forty years to be exact. And there has been no adverse health and safety report in the tourist town.

The Rhodia company is an active player in the rare earths business. It is a leading processor of rare earths. In fact, it's the only fully integrated

Malaysia was the world's no. 1 producer of tin. Along with tin, there's always Thorium and Uranium and therefore this is not Malaysia's first facility, AELB is industrial player to have manufacturing operations and raw material supply both within and outside China.

The plant in La Rochelle has been in operation for more than 50 years.

In the early years, the plant processed rare earths ore concentrates from Australia and China just like Lynas would. For 40 years, the plant was operated in this manner, producing cerium for the world market.

The radioactive thorium residues have been stored within the plant's 40ha site for the past 50 years. During storage, the residues are regularly monitored by the country's regulatory authority, the equivalent of our Atomic Energy Licensing Board (AELB).

They believe the stored thorium salts will become a fuel of the future.

What is clear is that the rare earths processing facility in La Rochelle has been operating for more than five decades without harming the population. Instead, La Rochelle has thrived over the years as an attractive tourist destination not only for the French but also for holiday-makers from other European countries and even as far away as the United States.

Through the deployment of stringent health and safety standards, the chemical plant has been of no consequence to the local community.

Instead, it has contributed to the local economy not only in terms of job opportunities but also tax revenues.

After visiting La Rochelle, it beats me why there are still people who are so hung up on Lynas."Unquote

COMPARISON OF RADIOACTIVITY IN Bq (Specific activity.. number of atoms decaying in 1second)

Pure Thorium-232 = 4,080 Bq/gm

Pure Potassium-40 = 254,000 Bq/gm

Naturally Occurring Potassium (3 different isotopes) in our body and food = 31.825 Bq/gm

Artificially created Plutonium-238 = 634,000,000,000 Bq/gm (1/2 life=87.7 years)

Monazite ore from Amang or Tin Tailings in Malaysia = 284 Bq/gm

Lynas Rare Earth Waste = 6 Bq/gm


Quote: AELB (Atomic Energy Licensing Board, Malaysia):
has experience to handle this, to overcome this and AELB is prepared.


THERE ARE MORE THAN 10 FACILITIES THAT ARE VERY SIMILAR TO LYNAS.

SOME OF THEM ARE PRODUCING HIGHER RESIDUES, HIGHER CONCENTRATION OF URANIUM AND THORIUM.

AELB has been able to regulate and control these factories, so it is based on AELB experience and the experience of the industry abroad." Unquote


QUESTION: WHY IS IT THAT THERE ARE NO DEMONSTRATIONS BY
THE ANTI-LYNAS FOOT-SOLDIERS AGAINST THESE 10 CHEMICAL
PLANTS ALREADY IN MALAYSIA THAT ARE PRODUCING "WASTES
WITH HIGHER CONCENTRATIONS OF URANIUM AND THORIUM"?

ANSWER: 100% PURE POLITICS FROM TOXIC RADIOACTIVE
POLITICIANS !

Have a look at this video. Opinions of 2 nuclear scientists

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RPOGzrqu1Vg


Dato' Dr Looi

hwlooi said...

The Problem: A Mountain of Lynas Waste ?


A reader once asked " Would it be safe to say 132,000,000,000 Bq will be resulting from 22,000 tonnes of Lynas waste even though it has only 6 Bq per gm?"

Well, Thorium-232 produces only alpha rays (gamma rays from daughter isotopes are insignificant, please see below) which cannot pass through even a thin piece of paper or the surface of the skin.

If you have a lump of pure Thorium-232, all you need to do is to wrap it up in newspaper and that will stop all the alpha radiation from getting out!

Since alpha particles of Thorium-232 which decay with energies of 3.8 to about 4.8 MeV can travel only a couple of centimetres in air, only less than 50 micron in fluids and much less in solid material, even if you have a huge pile of Lynas waste, the external radiation would not increase by much because only a tiny percentage of thorium-232 atoms directly on the surface of the pile will be able to radiate out their alpha particles.

Those just below the surface will remain inside the pile. Each alpha particle will just pick up 2 electrons and be converted to the simple non-radioactive helium gas.

Even those alpha particles from the surface will be converted to harmless helium gas after a few centimetres through the air.

So all that your mountain of Lynas waste will only "radiate" harmless non-radioactive Helium gas.

That's why I always tell the anti-lynas clique that I have no problem in keeping a few hundred kilograms of pure Thorium-232 in my house. Because I would be keeping the Thorium-232 in the form of a solid metallic sphere where the surface area to unit volume is minimum and since metallic Thorium-232 is superb radiation shield, practically all the tiny amount of radiation produced, are auto-shielded by the metallic Thorium-232 ! Radiation risk from pure Thorium-232 is minute and keeping it in a the form of a metallic sphere and wrapping it up in newspaper would cut the radiation to a completely harmless level !

The radiation of 6 Bq/gm from the weakly radioactive Thorium-232 in the Lynas waste is so low that even IAEA do not consider it significant and as such can be transported without any special permission.


One reader stated that although Thorium-232 may not be dangerous, all their "daughter" isotopes have very short half-lives like Radon-220 and these are highly radioactive, so how could we say that Thorium-232 is not dangerous.

Well, the reason is obvious. But I find great difficulty in explaining to the layman the reason why when an element with an extremely long half-life that decays into isotopes with very short half-life, there is minimal accumulation of the short half-life isotopes and as such do not build up into a large enough quantity to pose any significant hazard.

I will try to explain by this simple analogy.
If there are 2 million people waiting outside a stadium and 1 million people managed to get into the stadium after 14,000,000,000 years (half-life of Thorium-232), it means that you will see only 1 person getting into the stadium every 14,000 years.

But once in the stadium the half-life of the new person (half-life of Radon-220 from the Thorium-232 decay chain is only 55 seconds) is so short when compared with those outside (Thorium-232) that he has left the stadium almost immediately. Getting in is extremely slow but getting out is extremely fast!

Since only 1 person gets into the stadium every 14,000 years, if you look into the stadium you will see it as empty most of the time!

It is just like trying to fill up a bucket by a slow, slow drop by drop drip and the bucket has a big hole at the bottom. If you look into the bucket you will see practically little or no water in it!

Since the Lynas waste product has only 6 Bq/gm of radioactivity, the chance of detecting any significant amount of radon gas is pretty slim indeed.

Dato' Dr Looi

hwlooi said...

Lynas radioactive and toxic waste will polute our air and water?

Kuantan People Not Miners and Lynas plant is not a rare earth mine.

Quote:
"vast tracts of lands and thousands of square kilometres have been rendered hazardous, with toxic runoffs destroying everything in their path, and with high radioactivity, tainting and polluting precious water supplies." Unquote

I HAVE TO KEEP REPEATING THAT KUANTAN PEOPLE ARE NOT MINERS IN THE RARE EARTH OR URANIUM OR THORIUM MINES.

The " with toxic runoffs destroying everything in their path, and with high radioactivity, tainting and polluting precious water supplies.",
ARE FROM THE MINES AND NOT FROM THE MODERN REFINING CHEMICAL PLANTS!

PLEASE DO NOT KEEP ON REFERRING US IN KUANTAN AND COMPARING US TO "THE WORKERS IN THE MINES EXPOSED TO THORIUM BY INHALATION OF FINE PARTICLES !

" Thorium-232 is considered to be a carcinogen only IF ADMINISTERED INTRAVENOUSLY AS A COLLOIDAL DISPERSION OF THORIUM-232 DIOXIDE."

AND NOBODY FROM LYNAS IS GOING AROUND IN KUANTAN INJECTING US WITH THORIUM DIOXIDE !!

I REPEAT: KUANTAN PEOPLE ARE NOT RARE EARTH OR THORIUM MINERS !

The rare earth miners in the case of the Lynas Rare Earth Plant are still in a place called Mount Weld in Western Australia !

If there is any long term lung problem, the Australians are the ones who will be getting those problems and not the Kuantan people.

Kuantan people are just ordinary traders, office workers, taxi drivers or just hanging around doing nothing in the air-conditioned malls.

It is tantamount to claiming that since workers in the granite quarries and underground tin mines developed severe lung disease (silicosis) and lung cancer from inhaling dust containing silica (sand), the millions of tons of sand in our beaches should be relocated to somewhere safe or shipped back to...?Australia.

con't

hwlooi said...

con't

Definite evidence that crystalline silica (Sand, Sio2) is associated with an increased rate of lung cancer led the International Agency for Research on
Cancer (IARC) to conclude in 1997 that crystalline silica is a known human
carcinogen.

You can find the data even in Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IARC_Group_1_carcinogens

Normally the IARC list do not detail the conditions which is attached to the agent before it can be deemed to be carcinogenic.

You can find the data in the IARC monograph when they approved the labelling of Thorium-232 as a carcinogen.

For instance even ordinary Sand (crystalline silica, SiO2) is classified as a group 1 Carcinogen (a confirmed cancer causing agent), but as you know, we do not expect a huge number of people in living in the deserts or along the seashores to die from silica induced lung cancer.
The lung cancer risk occurs only when fine sand (silica) is inhaled by miners for a prolonged period in the quarries and mines i.e. silica is not a carcinogen when ingested and of course not when injected for nobody would allow you to inject sand into their veins.

The same condition apply to Thorium-232 i.e.
" Thorium-232 is considered to be a carcinogen only IF ADMINISTERED INTRAVENOUSLY AS A COLLOIDAL DISPERSION OF THORIUM-232 DIOXIDE."

Practically all the data on Thorium-232 and cancer comes from the intravenous injection of Thorotrast.
In the past where huge doses of 25cc to 50 cc of a 25%solution of Thorium dioxide (Thorotrast) was injected into the vein for contrast radiological studies, a very small number out of the 4 million or so patients were believed to have developed cancers 20 to 30 years later in their old age.

I repeat: NOBODY FROM LYNAS IS GOING AROUND IN KUANTAN INJECTING US WITH THORIUM DIOXIDE !!



Part of the IARC list of Carcinogens in :


• Schistosoma haematobium (infection with)
• Silica, crystalline (inhaled in the form of quartz or cristobalite from occupational sources)
• Solar radiation
• Talc containing asbestiform fibres
• Tamoxifen5
• 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-para-dioxin
• Thiotepa (1,1',1"-Phosphinothioylidynetrisaziridine)
•Thorium-232 and its decay products, administered intravenously as a colloidal dispersion of thorium-232 dioxide
• Treosulfan
• ortho-Toluidine
• Vinyl chloride
• Ultraviolet Radiation
• X-Radiation and Gamma radiation

Best regards,

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London)

*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/16/rare-earth-a-richer-malaysia-and-a-greener-world/#comment-76493

hwlooi said...

AELB

Quote: AELB (Atomic Energy Licensing Board, Malaysia):

Malaysia was the world's no. 1 producer of tin. Along with tin, there's always Thorium and Uranium and therefore this is not Malaysia's first facility, AELB is has experience to handle this, to overcome this and AELB is prepared.

THERE ARE MORE THAN 10 FACILITIES THAT ARE VERY SIMILAR TO LYNAS.

SOME OF THEM ARE PRODUCING HIGHER RESIDUES, HIGHER CONCENTRATION OF URANIUM AND THORIUM.

AELB has been able to regulate and control these factories, so it is based on AELB experience and the experience of the industry abroad." Unquote



QUESTION: WHY IS IT THAT THERE ARE NO DEMONSTRATIONS BY
THE ANTI-LYNAS FOOT-SOLDIERS AGAINST THESE 10 CHEMICAL
PLANTS ALREADY IN MALAYSIA THAT ARE PRODUCING "WASTES
WITH HIGHER CONCENTRATIONS OF URANIUM AND THORIUM"?


ANSWER: 100% PURE POLITICS FROM TOXIC RADIOACTIVE
POLITICIANS !


Dato' Dr Looi

hwlooi said...

DURING A PSC (Parliamentary Select Committee) MEETING:


Quote from New Straits Times:

"Earlier, the committee and members of the public who watched the hearing at UMP Chancellery lobby were shocked when a lecturer from the university's Industrial Science and Technology Faculty told the committee that he had been dealing with rare earth for more than 20 years without any adverse effects to his health.

"I EVEN USED MY BARE HANDS WHEN EXTRACTING RARE EARTH

ELEMENTS BUT TO DATE, THE RADIOACTIVE LEVEL IN MY BODY IS

VERY LOW," SAID PROFESSOR JOSE RAJAN FROM KERALA, INDIA.

Rajan explained that the existing technology, including those available in India, had matured and could handle radioactive materials and waste effectively.

"We must educate the people like what we did in Kerala. We also faced the opposition in the initial stage (of the rare earth industry) but with accurate information and the right approach, even the protesters can be educated," he said." Unquote

Comparison of Radioactivity in Bq (Specific Activity: number of atoms decaying in 1second)

Pure freshly separated Thorium-232 = 4,080 Bq/gm

Pure Potassium-40 = 254,000 Bq/gm

Naturally Occurring Potassium (3 different isotopes) in our body and food = 31.825 Bq/gm

Artificially created Plutonium-238 = 634,000,000,000 Bq/gm (1/2 life=87.7 years)

Monazite ore from Amang or Tin Tailings in Malaysia = 284 Bq/gm

Lynas Rare Earth Waste = 6 Bq/gm

It has been estimated that in the worst case scenario, the radiation risk from the Lynas plant within a radius of 1 km is only 0.002 mSv/yr.

In Ramsar, Iran, the naturally occurring radiation
is extremely high at 260 mSv/yr. This is 13,000,000% higher than the expected worse case scenario in Kuantan.


Dosage in Biological Effect in mSv.

Sleeping next to someone like your wife for 8 hours daily = 0.02 mSv/yr (10x Lynas worst case)

Sleeping in wooden house = 0.20 mSv/yr (100x Lynas worst case)

Smoking a pack of cigarettes daily 0.20 mSv/yr (100x Lynas worst case)

Slag brick and granite house = up to 2.0 mSv/yr (1,000x Lynas worst case)

Chest X-ray = 0.10 mSv

Medical or dental X-ray 0.39 mSv

CT Scan (Chest) = 10 mSv (5,000 x Lynas worst case scenario)

CT Fluoroscopy of abdomen and pelvis 6 to 90 mSv (median=31 mSv)


(Source: UNSCEAR and EPA and IAEA)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RPOGzrqu1Vg


Dato' Dr Looi

hwlooi said...

Comparison of Radioactivity in Bq (Specific Activity: number of atoms decaying in 1second)

Pure freshly separated Thorium-232 = 4,080 Bq/gm

Pure Potassium-40 = 254,000 Bq/gm

Naturally Occurring Potassium (3 different isotopes) in our body and food = 31.825 Bq/gm

Artificially created Plutonium-238 = 634,000,000,000 Bq/gm (1/2 life=87.7 years)

Monazite ore from Amang or Tin Tailings in Malaysia = 284 Bq/gm

Lynas Rare Earth Waste = 6 Bq/gm

It has been estimated that in the worst case scenario, the radiation risk from the Lynas plant within a radius of 1 km is only 0.002 mSv/yr.

In Ramsar, Iran, the naturally occurring radiation
is extremely high at 260 mSv/yr. This is 13,000,000% higher than the expected worse case scenario in Kuantan.


Dosage in Biological Effect in mSv.

Sleeping next to someone for 8 hours 0.02 mSv/yr (10x Lynas worst case)

Sleeping in wooden house = 0.20 mSv/yr (100x Lynas worst case)

Smoking a pack of cigarettes daily 0.20 mSv/yr (100x Lynas worst case)

Slag brick and granite house = up to 2.0 mSv/yr (1,000x Lynas worst case)

Chest X-ray = 0.10 mSv

Medical or dental X-ray 0.39 mSv

CT Scan (Chest) = 10 mSv

CT Fluoroscopy of abdomen and pelvis 6 to 90 mSv (median=31 mSv)


(Source: UNSCEAR and EPA and IAEA)


Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah.
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London).
*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RPOGzrqu1Vg


hwlooi said...

Comment by Anti-Lynas on article by Ahmad Ibrahim,
Fellow of Academy of Sciences, Malaysia Quote: " It is with ridiculous and SAD to read the article and statement by our own science academician (e.g. CEO of ASM) on the rare earth processing plant in La Rochelle. Again, it just showed that how “un-informed” (or unwilling) is our so called “scientist” in finding the facts on the rare earth industry.
The plant in La Rochelle is not like Lynas. They don't store the waste in their vicinity, the waste is stored in a facility specialized in disposing radioactive waste." Unquote.


ANSWER:


The La Rochelle plant uses Monazite-(Ce)...(Ce, La, Nd, Th, Y)PO4 and this is by far the most common and most radioactive of the 3 types of monazite ore. The other 2 types which are Monazite-(La) and Monazite-(Nd).

The monazite from Malaysian Tin tailings has 6 to 7% Thorium-232 and has an activity of 284 Bq/g.

WASTES
Until the end of 1974, THE PLANT RELEASED ALL RADIOACTIVE LIQUIDS AND SOLIDS DIRECTLY INTO THE SEA (WHERE LOCALS AS WELL AS TOURISTS ARE SWIMMING)! Since, and until the end of 1990, it sent at least a part of the solid residues to the CSM. These wastes are composed, among other substances, of thorium 232, uranium 238, and their descendants (including radium 226 and 228).
SOLID WASTES
--A solid residue resulting from the processing prior to July 1994 and described by Andra as “Résidu solide banalisé” (RSB), solid residue made commonplace.

As of June 1999, 8025 tons (50% moisture) with an activity of 217 GBq were on the PLANT site. The thorium 232 in the DRY PRODUCT REPRESENTED 48 Bq/g AND THE URANIUM 238, 6 Bq/g MAKING A TOTAL OF 54 Bq/g.

Rhône-Poulenc placed 61,000 t of what Andra describes as RSB into a waste site located near its factory and belonging to the city of La Rochelle (Port de Pallice). The residues contain in particular thorium 232 (48 Bq/g dry product) and uranium 238 (6 Bq/g dry product), for a total of 1.65 TBq [Andra 00].
--Radioactive minerals that have not been attacked. According to Andra, they have been used to fill in a part of the plant site;

--Substances in suspension, the only residue produced by the minerals used today. 10,048 t (50% moisture) containing thorium 232 (2.6 Bq/g ) and uranium 238 (4.7Bq/g) for a total of 37 GBq are stored at the plant;

--Tailings, containing thorium 232, uranium 238, and their descendents including radium. They are more radioactive than the RSB (see above). They are located at Cadarache and presumably in the bay of La Rochelle. They were stored for a time at the CSM.

--Thorium nitrate and crude thorium hydroxide. The 2000 inventory of Andra states in a footnote that it does not take into consideration some 11,000 t of thorium nitrate (mass activity 1650 Bq/g) and about 20,000 t of crude thorium hydroxide (mass activity 720 Bq/g), the “historic” residue of the processing prior to mid-1994, because these substances are “commercialized at present “by Rhodia Terres Rares.

The thorium nitrate is used in the manufacture of lamp sleeves; the hydroxide “is a potential raw material.” Apparently these substances are stored at the site [Andra 99]. The 1997 inventory of Andra listed the hydroxide as a waste.

The waste thorium nitrate (mass activity 1650 Bq/g) has an activity which is 27,500% higher than the waste from Lynas which is only 6 Bq/g! Apparently these substances are stored at the site [Andra 99].


8,025 TONS OF WASTE WITH AN ACTIVITY OF 217 GBq were still stored in the compounds of the plant.

THIS "LOW RADIOACTICITY WASTE" has 48 Bq/g from Thorium 232 and 6 Bq/g from Uranium-238 giving a total of 54 Bq/g.

You have to realise that 54 Bq/g is 900% higher than that of the Lynas waste of 6 Bq/g.
And these wastes are still being stored in the compound of the plant.

IF THE FRENCH ARE NOT WORRIED ABOUT 54 Bq/g OF RADIOACTIVITY, WHY ARE SOME MALAYSIANS SO FRIGHTENED OF ONLY 6 Bq/g?

Answer: 100% pure politics from toxic radioactive politicians!

Dato' Dr Looi

hwlooi said...

QUESTION BY ANTI-LYNAS: "CAN YOU BE SURE THAT THE LYNAS PLANT IS 100% SAFE ?
.

AND AS FAR AS THE 100% BUSINESS IS CONCERNED, THE ONLY THING IN LIFE WHICH WE CAN BE A 100% SURE OF IS THE CEMETERY AND THE LAVATORY. IF WE HAVE TO GO, WE HAVE TO GO 100%.

The chance of dying one day is 100%. So do not worry yourself to death about it!

• Dying from heart disease -- 1 in 6 (lifetime risk)
• Dying in an auto accident -- 1 in 75 (lifetime risk)
• Committing suicide -- 1 in 71 (lifetime risk)
• Being Murdered -- 1 in 140 (lifetime)
DYING FROM CANCER - 1 in 5 (lifetime risk)
• Being struck by lightning -- 1 in 10,456 (lifetime)
• Seriously injuring yourself while shaving -- 1 in 5,844 (annual risk)
• Going to prison this year -- 1 in 139
• Dying from falling out of your bed or chair -- 1 in 513,142
• Being stuck and killed by a falling aircraft -- 1 in 25 million
• Getting food poisoning -- 1 in 8 (annual risk)
• Hiring a sleazy lawyer -- 1 in 8
• Freezing to death (in non-tropical countries) -- 1 in 780,938 (annual risk)

SO ANTI-LYNAS FOLKS, IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO DIE FROM CANCER OR SOMETHING NASTY, THE BEST THING TO DO IS NOT TO BE BORN!

If one is already born, the best way to avoid dying from cancer is to die young from other illnesses like dengue, bird flu or malaria or from accidents!

MAYBE, IF ONE IS ALREADY BORN, ONE OF THE MOST PLEASANT WAY TO DIE IS TO DIE UNDER GA (GENERAL ANAESTHESIA) WHEN HAVING A SURGICAL OPERATION.

VERY PLEASANT, NO PAIN, NO KNOWLEDGE, JUST LIKE GOING TO A NORMAL SLEEP AND YOU DIE UNDER THE CLEAR KNOWLEDGE THAT YOUR WIFE AND FAMILY WILL BE WELL TAKEN CARE OF FINANCIALLY because they will be able to sue the surgeon and hospital for millions of dollars ! Dying in any other way which include heart disease, infection, renal failure, lung failure, cancer or even "old age" can be rather painful and uncomfortable !

The risk of dying from a road traffic related accident in Malaysia is much higher than that which has been predicted for the death from radiation induced cancers.

For instance in 2009, there were 6,745 deaths in a population of 27.9 million giving a rate of 24.17 deaths per 100,000.

The main reason why the people of Kuantan is so frightened of the "Fukushimization" of the Lynas plant is pure and simple politics.

A member of the coalition of one of the anti-lynas organisation said in one of the Blogs:

Quote: "Thanks for the clarification. I agree with you, the will of the people must prevail, IRREGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE LAMP IS SAFE OR NOT1" Unquote.

What the above statement means in simple non-Australian English is that THE WHOLE ISSUE IS 100% POLITICS AND THERE IS REALLY NOTHING WRONG WITH THE LYNAS PROJECT except that it is a fantastic political tool for certain politicians to gain POWER.

ONCE THE GENERAL ELECTION IS OVER, LYNAS WILL BECOME A HIGHLY BENEFICIAL PROJECT especially if they win!

THERE ARE NO DANGEROUS RADIATION, NO TOXIC WASTE PROBLEM BUT A LOT OF TOXIC, RADIOACTIVE POLITICIANS with a lot of innocent naive brainwashed followers.

Dr Looi.

*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242

hwlooi said...

ANTI-LYNAS FOLKS ARE ADDICTED TO EXAGGERATION.

e.g. RIDICULOUS CLAIM: 1 QUARTER OF A MILLION PEOPLE SUPPORTED THE GREENIES DURING BERSIH 3 !
.

Quote: Lu Cheng Long

"Everyone claims that their view represent the majority. So the majority really reject Lynas? I don't know, but anti Lynas people sure make a lot noise. But we know well informed people support Lynas.

ANOTHER THING IS DURING BERSIH 3, I SAW LOTS AND LOTS OF YELLOW, ONLY A HANDFUL OF PITIFUL GREEN. IT MUST BE A VERY HARD FEELING FOR ANTI LYNAS PEOPLE THINKING THAT THE NATION IS WITH THEM' Unquote

Helicopter pictures of the main section of the crowd with subsequent computer analysis of "Bersih 3" published in the Sin Chew Newspaper (yes, the Sin Chew Newspaper which is very sympathetic to the anti lynas people ) showed that the total number of people attending the demonstration in the main section was less than 5,000 people and not 250,000 people as claimed by some.

And only a tiny miserable proportion of these people are the "GREENIES".

This type of gross exaggeration is very typical of the anti-lynas crowd.

Now you know how a simple chemical plant can be magically and conveniently transformed in to a Nuclear Plant!

HOPE THE SO CALLED INTERNATIONAL DEMONSTRATION NEXT WEEK BY A FEW MALAYSIAN GREENIES (OR BLACK SHIRTIES) AND A FEW AUSTRALIAN LOONIES WILL NOT BE INTERPRETED AS A WORLD WIDE ANTI-LYNAS DEMONSTRATION !

REMEMBER, THERE ARE ABOUT 194 COUNTRIES WITH ABOUT 600,000 CITIES AND TOWNS IN THE WORLD.

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjT1kUAy_08&feature=player_detailpage

hwlooi said...

The Learned Hon Prof. Chan :

QUOTE:
Quote from the Hon. Professor "...childhood leukaemias observed among the children of Bukit Merah? (Recall also the inverse square law — the intensity of radiation from a radioactive particle a metre away from a human body increases a trillion-fold when that same particle sits at micron-level distances on the body’s cells and tissues.)

ANSWER by Ng Ai Soo

"The inverse square law applies to trillions and trillions of particles, not just the one particle. That one particle IS the radiation only "dilutes" in a quantum sense... it otherwise remains one particle no matter how far it is from the source... so the cellular damage by that one particle is the same, no matter how far it travelled to get into the cell. But it must survive that journey into the cell and for different particles the survival rates are different.

The Hon. Prof. Chan

A quick response to Ng Ai Soo (?): I’m referring to macroscopic radioactive particles (e.g. thorium-containing dusts), not to a radioactive atomic nucleus nor sub-atomic particles.

Comment by Me.

1. In addition to the clarification by Ng Ai Soo of the inappropriateness in invoking the inverse square law to just one particle, if we assume that the intensity is increased by a trillion fold, an alpha particle from Thorium-232 with an energy of 4 MeV is magnified by a factor of 1 trillion, the energy would be 0.64 Joules and this is so "intense" that all the cells that are hit, will be vaporized. We know that DEAD cells do not and cannot turn into cancer cells!

2. Even if we are referring to thorium-containing dusts in Bukit Merah and "not to a radioactive atomic nucleus nor sub-atomic particles,"
it would not work either because at 1 metre away, alpha particles from the Thorium-232 can travel about a couple of centimetres, and since the cells are subjected to an intensity of radiation at 1 metre = 0 units.
Therefore at micron level, 0 multiplied by 1 Trillion is still = 0 units

This shows that if we use retrograde calculations in these situations, we can end up with some rather embarrassing results.







QUOTE:
: "Dr Looi’s cites the Argonne National Lab’s fact sheet on thorium to argue that only a miniscule portion of thorium-232 which is ingested via food or water is absorbed into the bloodstream, of which only 4 per cent gets deposited in the liver where it is retained with a biological half-life of 700 days."

ANSWER:

" I have never quoted the Argonne National-Lab's fact sheet in any of my postings. This is just a figment of the fertile but confused imagination of a person infected by the highly dangerous anti-lynas virus.


QUOTE:
" Allow me also to bring to Dr Looi’s attention a 1993-1994 study of male miners at the Bayun Obo rare earths and iron mine in Inner Mongolia which was reported in the Journal of Radiological Protection in 2005.
In that study, highly dust-exposed miners had 5.15 times the age-adjusted lung cancer rate compared to the rate among Chinese males in the general population. "

ANSWER:

It was claimed that a 20 year study in one of the largest rare earth mine, the Bayun Obo mine has shown that inhalation Thorium has proven to cause lung cancer. The number of miners in 2001 were 6,983 of which 3016 were exposed to dense dust in the mine.

After correcting for the heavy smoking, there was an excess of 10 cases of lung cancer in workers who had worked for about 30 years or so in the mine.

But this study cannot exclude crystalline silica (SiO2) in the dust as being the cause of the lung cancers. Silica is a confirmed carcinogen while Thorium by inhalation or ingestion is not.

SILICA IS A CONFIRMED GROUP 1 CARCINOGEN by inhalation whereas Thorium-232 is considered to be a carcinogen only IF ADMINISTERED INTRAVENOUSLY AS A COLLOIDAL DISPERSION OF THORIUM-232 DIOXIDE." (IARC).

cont

hwlooi said...


cont

QUOTE: "

The “safe thresholds” of 1 mSv/yr (public) and 20 mSv/yr (occupational) that Dr Looi, Dr Che Rosli Che Mat (MP, Hulu Langat), Lynas, AELB, and IAEA repeatedly invoke are derived from ICRP risk models which are currently under critical scrutiny and challenge, IN THE WAKE OF EXCESS CHILDHOOD LEUKAEMIA NEAR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS that can’t be explained by radiation exposures which are much below the “safe thresholds”.


ANSWER:

The British study (COMARE) published in 2010 clearly showed that there is NO INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF LEUKAEMIA CASES in young children living near nuclear power plants.

This study which covers a period of over 35 years is far more comprehensive than the French study which covers only a period of 5 years.
The research, conducted by scientists on the Committee of the Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment (COMARE), found only 20 cases of childhood leukaemia within 5 km (3.1 miles) of nuclear power stations between 1969 and 2004.
The rate was virtually the same as in areas where there were no nuclear plants.
A study on Germany, published in 2007, did find a significantly increased risk, but the COMARE team said these findings were probably influenced by an unexplained leukaemia cluster near a nuclear plant in Krummel, north Germany, that lasted from 1990 to 2005.
Excluding Krummel, evidence for an increased leukaemia risk among young children living close to German nuclear power plants was "extremely weak", it said.
The French study found that between 2002 and 2007 (only 5 years), 14 children under the age of 15 living in a 5-kilometre radius of France's 19 nuclear power plants had been diagnosed with leukaemia.

This number of cases (14 in 5 years) is so small that even a small unaccounted unknown factor would lead to a false statistical result.


QUOTE:

"The US Public Health Service (1990) reports that the natural background level in North American soil is typically ~ 6 ppm of thorium."
ANSWER:
Nick Tsurikov, Radiation Safety Expert: " THE MAJORITY OF THIS LYNAS "WASTE" WILL HAVE ONLY HALF THE THORIUM THAN IN NORMAL MALAYSIAN SOIL.
So, in fact most of Lynas residues are only half as radioactive as the sand the kids all over Malaysia play in the kindergartens" (Note: Sand or crystalline SiO2 is also classified as a group 1 Carcinogen by IARC).
If you do look through the Lynas RIA together with UN (not IAEA) reports - you will clearly see that two most 'voluminous' residues from LAMP will have less than 12 parts per million of thorium - and the average Malaysian soil - 20 parts per million of thorium. Of course, the third 'residue stream' will have about 1500 ppm of thorium and will need to be managed appropriately


cont

hwlooi said...

cont

QUOTE:
"A UK expert panel for instance (2004, www.cerrie.org : ttp://www.cerrie.org/) could not arrive at a consensus regarding the health risks of low-level exposure to internal emitters (inhaled or ingested radioactive particles). Opinions among the UK panel members ranged from negligible adverse effects to an underestimation of risk by at least a 100-fold."

ANSWER:
Quote: Nick Tsurikov, Radiation Safety Expert "The point that I would like to make is to illustrate clearly that ECRR "100-200 times" factors cannot possibly be correct - have a look:

The 'official' risk of getting cancer from radiation exposure is 1 in 20,000 per 1 milliSievert of dose. So, if the hazard is 'understated' by, say, 200 times - it becomes 1 in 100, per 1 mSv of dose.

Thousands of people in Malaysian amang industry and in heavy mineral sands industry world-wide have been exposed to about 5 mSv every year for (let's say, on average) 6 years of working life, so their cumulative dose was 30 mSv.

WHICH MEANS THAT IF ECRR IS CORRECT, EVERY THIRD WORKER IN THE AMANG INDUSTRY WOULD BE DEAD FROM CANCER BY NOW !

And what about those who were exposed to about 20 mSv for five years or more (in any industry, uranium included) - in accordance with the ECRR coefficients - the chance is 1 in 1, so they are all dead from cancer by now...

I do not see any cancer epidemic happening... What about all the tin miners in Malaysia in 1950's-1970's: they all should've died within several years after starting their work (as their coefficient would be close to 5 to 1...) Just some points for general consideration..." Unquote.

Dr Looi
*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242

hwlooi said...

Anti- Lynas QUOTE:
Potassium-40, when absorbed, is distributed more uniformly throughout the human body, mostly in muscle tissue which is among the least radio-sensitive of the body’s tissues, Thorium entering the bloodstream localises to the bones where it is retained with a biological half-life of 22 years

ANSWER:
When Potassium is taken into the body it is not just concentrated in the muscles but concentrated in the INTRACELLULAR spaces of ALL CELLS where the cancer sensitive chromosomes are located!

So to say that Potassium concentration is less in the radiosensitive cells of the blood, lymphoid tissues, testis, ovaries and intestine is definitely not in line with basic human physiology.

It is concentrated and equally distributed in ALL INTRACELLULAR SPACES . In terms of per cell mass, it may be slightly less only in fat cells.

Intracellular Potassium = 139 to 140 mEq
Extracellular Potassium = 4 mEq which is tiny compared with the Intracellular Potassium.

Thorium-232 stays mainly in the extracellular space where it is not so harmful.
Practically all the data on the acute and long term toxicology of Thorium-232 comes from the study of Thorotrast.

Most of the human data for thorium exposure comes from diagnostic studies. A massive dose of 1 to 2 vials of 25 ml of 25% Colloidal thorium-232 dioxide (Thorotrast) was injected into patients as a radiographic contrast medium between 1928 and 1955.

Thorium dioxide in Thorotrast is insoluble and in a colloidal form i.e. in the form of particles. All insoluble particles are taken up by the macrophages and other cells of the reticulo-endothelial (RE) system and deposited into the tissues of the RE system i.e. the liver, spleen, lymph nodes, bone marrow and parts of the small intestines and not just the bones.


In humans, where will the soluble and not particulate form of Thorium salts be deposited and what is the renal clearance and hence their biological half life ? Nobody really knows because, for obvious reasons, all studies done on Thorium are conducted on animals. The results are only applicable to rats, rabbits, cats and dogs !
cont.

hwlooi said...

cont.
In places like Kerala, a coastal belt in India, the concentration of Thorium-232 in the soil average about 4,000 ppm.
The radiation at Karunagapally, Kerala has been assessed at 5 to 8 milisievert/year. In certain location on the coast, it is as high as 70 milisievert/year.

Thorium-232 is strongly adsorbed to clay and there is no natural way it can get into the body. Even the plants and fruits do not contain any Thorium in these high Thorium areas.

The amount of Thorium in the human body is so tiny (estimated to be only 30 micrograms per body) that only extremely sophisticated equipments are able to measure the true level.

The epidemiological data from these studies show that the primary health effects of high doses of injected Thorotrast are blood disorders and liver tumours. However, these tumours and blood disorders could have been caused by the massive doses of X-rays from the rather antique X-ray machines used at that time.

Because these are contrast studies, more than 20 to 50 X-rays need to be taken and the dose is really massive. None of the studies have factored in this massive dose of X-rays as all the studies are done retrospectively.

Some evidence of increased incidence of lung, pancreatic, and haematopoietic cancers was found in workers occupationally exposed to thorium via inhalation.

However, these workers were also exposed to several other toxic agents especially Silica (SiO2) which is a group 1 carcinogen and in some cases to other radionuclides like Uranium, K-40 and Radium, so direct causation cannot be inferred.

Inhalation of Thorium-232 by the general population like those living in the cities is practically impossible for the particles that can get into the lungs need to be between 1 to 5 microns. These tiny particles can only be found in the thorium or uranium mines or unsophisticated refineries.

Few data are available regarding the health effects associated with low (e.g., environmental) levels of exposure from either inhalation or ingestion.


Dr Looi

*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242

hwlooi said...

Anti-Lynas Quote: " Thorium from Lynas is Tenorm and a radioactive waste which has serious health risks."


Definition of TENORM: Formal definition of TENORM by the National Academy of Sciences as:

"Technologically enhanced naturally occurring radioactive materials are any naturally occurring radioactive materials not subject to regulation under the Atomic Energy Act whose radionuclide concentrations or potential for human exposure have been increased above levels encountered in the natural state by human activities."

ORE FOR LYNAS PLANT = 1,600 ppm (parts per million)
2 MOST VOLUMINOUS LYNAS "WASTE" = 12 ppm
3rd RESIDUE STREAM = 1,500 ppm of Thorium
AVERAGE MALAYSIAN SOIL = 20 ppm OF THORIUM

SO HOW CAN YOU CALL THE LYNAS "WASTE" A TENORM ?

Nick Tsurikov, Radiation Safety Expert: " THE MAJORITY OF THIS LYNAS "WASTE" WILL HAVE ONLY HALF THE THORIUM THAN IN NORMAL MALAYSIAN SOIL.
So, in fact most of Lynas residues are only half as radioactive as the sand the kids all over Malaysia play in the kindergartens" (Note: Sand or crystalline SiO2 is also classified as a group 1 Carcinogen by IARC).
If you do look through the Lynas RIA together with UN (not IAEA) reports - you will clearly see that two most 'voluminous' residues from LAMP will have less than 12 parts per million of thorium - and the average Malaysian soil - 20 parts per million of thorium. Of course, the third 'residue stream' will have about 1500 ppm of thorium and will need to be managed appropriately

COMPARISON OF RADIOACTIVITY IN Bq (Specific activity.. number of atoms decaying in 1second)

Pure Thorium-232 = 4,080 Bq/gm

Pure Potassium-40 = 254,000 Bq/gm

Naturally Occurring Potassium (3 different isotopes) in our body and food = 31.825 Bq/gm

Artificially created Plutonium-238 = 634,000,000,000 Bq/gm (1/2 life=87.7 years)

Monazite ore from Amang or Tin Tailings in Malaysia = 284 Bq/gm

Lynas Rare Earth Waste = 6 Bq/gm


Quote: AELB (Atomic Energy Licensing Board, Malaysia):

Malaysia was the world's no. 1 producer of tin. Along with tin, there's always Thorium and Uranium and therefore this is not Malaysia's first facility, AELB is has experience to handle this, to overcome this and AELB is prepared.


THERE ARE MORE THAN 10 FACILITIES THAT ARE VERY SIMILAR TO LYNAS.

SOME OF THEM ARE PRODUCING HIGHER RESIDUES, HIGHER CONCENTRATION OF URANIUM AND THORIUM.

AELB has been able to regulate and control these factories, so it is based on AELB experience and the experience of the industry abroad." Unquote


QUESTION: WHY IS IT THAT THERE ARE NO DEMONSTRATIONS BY
THE ANTI-LYNAS FOOT-SOLDIERS AGAINST THESE 10 CHEMICAL
PLANTS ALREADY IN MALAYSIA THAT ARE PRODUCING "WASTES
WITH HIGHER CONCENTRATIONS OF URANIUM AND THORIUM"?

Dr Looi

hwlooi said...

NICK TSURIKOV, RADIATION SAFETY SPECIALIST, ON LYNAS PLANT, QUOTE:


"The following has been confirmed way too many times and has NEVER EVER been proven to be false by anyone:


1. Radiation from the plant will be undetectable outside the boundaries;


2. None of the materials have to be signposted as 'radioactive' for transport - as per international regulations, since 1996;


3. In accordance with international guidelines, the plant can be allowed to operate pretty much anywhere in the world with minimal regulation;


4. Vast majority of tailings will have only half of thorium that is in normal Malaysian soil;


5. Thorium in other waste is insoluble and cannot 'poison' any plants, animals or the environment - even in theory;


6. Blending of tailings follows the basic safety principle of World Health Organisation, International Labour Organisation and seven more UN and other reputable international organisation - with guidelines on this existing in many countries;


7. Maximum dose to workers is not expected to be more that ~25% of the limit, therefore - in accordance with international guidelines - personal monitoring is not even necessary: the doses are so low that they can be assessed for a 'work group', no need for 'individual' assessments. Unquote.


ORE FOR LYNAS PLANT = 1,600 ppm (parts per million) of Thorium

2 MOST VOLUMINOUS LYNAS "WASTE" = 12 ppm of Thorium

SMALL 3rd RESIDUE STREAM = 1,500 ppm of Thorium

AVERAGE MALAYSIAN SOIL = 20 ppm OF THORIUM

Nick Tsurikov, Radiation Safety Expert: " THE MAJORITY OF THIS LYNAS "WASTE" WILL HAVE ONLY HALF THE THORIUM THAN IN NORMAL MALAYSIAN SOIL.

So, in fact most of Lynas residues are only half as radioactive as the sand the kids all over Malaysia play in the kindergartens" (Note: Sand or crystalline SiO2 is also classified as a group 1 Carcinogen by IARC).

If you do look through the Lynas RIA together with UN (not IAEA) reports - you will clearly see that two most 'voluminous' residues from LAMP will have less than 12 parts per million of thorium - and the average Malaysian soil - 20 parts per million of thorium. Of course, the third 'residue stream' will have about 1500 ppm of thorium and will need to be managed appropriately."

Warmest Regards,


Dato' Dr Looi

hwlooi said...

QUOTE ANTI-LYNAS FOOT SOLDIER: "DURING THE RECENT "INTERNATIONAL" DEMONSTRATION AGAINST LYNAS, A VOTE WAS TAKEN AND NEARLY ALL THE VOTERS ARE AGAINST LYNAS".

Misusing, Misrepresenting, Misleading and Misinterpreting legitimate scientific methodology and statistical analysis in order to distort the truth and further enhance the misinformation they have engraved into the innocent minds of their naive and innocent brainwashed followers, is the classical hallmark of the Anti-Lynas clique.
They assume that all Malaysians have IQs that would make even a chimpanzee laugh !
If you are to hold a "DEMONcratic" vote among Anti-Lynas people who are fanatical enough to take the trouble to go to a DEMONstration in order to massage the ego of their egoistic master brainwasher, it will not take even the intelligence of a 1 year old child to know what the outcome would be.
IT IS TANTAMOUNT TO TAKING A VOTE AT AN INTERNATIONAL PURE VEGETARIAN CONVENTION TO ASSESS HOW MANY PEOPLE IN THIS WORLD ARE AGAINST EATING MEAT.
And...... out comes... the answer :..."99.9999% OF THE PEOPLE OF THE WORLD ARE AGAINST EATING MEAT ! (not 100% only because a couple of people accidentally drop the slip into the wrong box like what they did in Kuantan !)
This type of statistics is best confined to the garbage bin. Come to think about it even the garbage bin is too clean for such crab ! Even the garbage bin might object !

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK) MRCP(London)

*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242


hwlooi said...

MOST OLDER MALAYSIAN ADULTS HAD BEEN IN CLOSE PROXIMITY WITH ALMOST PURE THORIUM-232 !

REMEMBER THE "WHITE GAS BULBS" OR RATHER KEROSENE GAS MANTLES MADE IN GERMANY?

THESE WERE USED IN THOSE LANTERNS WHICH GIVE OFF A VERY BRIGHT WHITE LIGHT AND WERE UNIVERSALLY USED BY ALL STREET HAWKERS IN THE WHOLE OF MALAYSIA IN THE 60s AND 70s?

THESE GAS MANTLES ARE MADE OF FABRIC SOAKED IN THORIUM-232 MIXED WITH A LITTLE CERIUM. AND AFTER THE INITIAL "FIRING" IT BECOMES ALMOST PURE THORIUM DIOXIDE.

IN THE BURNING KEROSENE VAPOUR, THE TEMPERATURE CAN REACH OVER 1,000 DEGREES CENTIGRADE.

MILLIONS OF MALAYSIANS IN THE PAST HAD HELD THESE "DANGEROUS, RADIOACTIVE" THORIUM GAS MANTLES IN THEIR HANDS.

THESE ARE STILL BEING SOLD FREELY AND WITHOUT ANY SPECIAL LICENSE FROM AELB.

REMEMBER THORIUM DIOXIDE HAS A SPECIFIC ACTIVITY OF 3,585 Bq/g ! THE "WASTE" FROM LYNAS IS ONLY 6 Bq/g.

WHY ARE FOLKS FROM THE ANTI-LYNAS CAMP SO FRIGHTEN OF 6 Bq/g FROM LYNAS WASTE WHILE NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE 3,585 Bq/g OF RADIATION FROM THEIR KEROSENE LAMP ?


Dr Looi
*
http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242



*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjT1kUAy_08&feature=player_detailpage

hwlooi said...

THORIUM-232, THOROTRAST, RADIATION AND CANCER

I have known about the controversy of Thorotrast (a 25 cc vial of a 25% colloidal suspension of Thorium dioxide) since I was a medical student in Manchester about 45 years ago and in fact I have been collecting a fair amount of data with regards to this contrast media.

Thorotrast was given as a contrast media via the vein and the dose of Thorium used was huge, though this depends on the type of radiological procedure done.

It had been estimated that as many as 4 million people were given this contrast in the 1930 to late 1950s.

It has been claimed that there was an increase in the incidence of cancers especially of the liver.

However, we need to consider a number of factors before we can be sure that this is the real culprit.

1) The radiation dose from those old X-ray machines in the 1930 to 1950s are hundreds of times that of the present machines.

For instance an 1896 X-ray machine was tested and found to have exposed the body to 1,500 times more radiation than modern technology does, largely because each image took 90 minutes to develop, dramatically increasing the patient's cumulative exposure to the rays. By 1930 to 1950s, the radiation dose have improved a lot but still much higher than the present X-ray machines.

Modern day X-rays require only about 21 milliseconds, and technicians place lead coverings over the body to protect vital organs from even this slight exposure.

Even in the 60s, the dose of X-rays from Tuberculosis screening is about 100 times higher than that of today's Chest X-Ray.

The fluoroscope leaves the X-ray beam "on" while the physician does his examination and as such, the fluoroscope has the potential to deliver very high X-ray doses.

In the 1920s, fluoroscopy became very popular procedure not only among radiologists, but also among many kinds of physicians.

Radiological methods of diagnosis became so important that no investigation of a patient is considered complete without the X-rays, which generally include fluoroscopy. These studies are often carried out by a general practitioner or surgeon in his office.


In 1942, Dr. Franz Buschke and Herbert M. Parker wrote (Buschke 1942):
"Recently we became aware of the fact that apparently a number of pediatricians include fluoroscopy in the monthly routine examinations of infants in their care during the first and second years of life." This pediatric practice is confirmed in Pifer 1963 and in Blatz 1970.
After studying the radiation output of seven fluoroscopes in the offices of "reputable pediatricians selected at random," Buschke and Parker estimated (Buschke 1942, p.527): "If the average rapid fluoroscopy by an experienced and well-adapted examiner takes twenty seconds, about 8.3 roentgens [entrance dose] will be delivered at this rate or 100 roentgens during the first year of life." The roentgen is a dose-unit which is approximately equivalent to a rad (actually it is less as the ICRU defined the roentgen to be 2.58e -4 C/Kg in 1971).
cont.

hwlooi said...

cont.
Fluoroscopy was popular also in hospitals.
(Braestrup 1942, p.213):
"During the past years, we have measured the roentgen output of large numbers of fluoroscopes, using the settings at which they are normally operated ... and have found a very wide variation ... Attention is called particularly to test B-116, where the R [roentgen] per minute at the panel was 127, that is, an erythema dose would be reached in about three minutes. Such a unit could be classified as a lethal diagnostic weapon and yet there are many of these still in use."
Of the various types of radiologic equipment, the mobile unit probably has been responsible for more radiation damage than any other piece of apparatus. These accidents have in most cases occurred while the mobile unit was used for fluoroscopy by surgeons, who apparently did not realize the high output obtained at short distances."

In an attempt to prevent some injuries, A LIMIT OF 100 ROENTGENS (1,000 mSv) per fluoroscopic examination was set in New York City hospitals (Braestrup 1969).

So the patients who received the Thorotrast were subjected to a huge dose of X-rays from these antique X-ray machines.

This huge dose of X-rays may be the cause of most of the cancers, we just do not know as most of the studies are unable to assess the X-ray's dose. All these studies are done 20 to 30 years later.
So we cannot use other patients who have X-rays done in the 1930s to 1950s as a control group since most X-rays which do not need a contrast media consist of only 1 or 2 X-ray pictures.
A few of the studies do have controls but these controls were cases from later years especially after 1947 when the advancement in radiological techniques and hence dosage reduction is greatest.

It is generally accepted that the risk of radiation induced cancer is 1 in 20,000 per mSv..
As such, a dose of 1,000 mSv would mean a risk of 1 in 20. For 4 million patients injected with Thorotrast, THIS RADIATION WOULD GIVE RISE TO 200,000 CASES OF RADIATION INDUCED CANCERS !

In 1953, Dade W. Moeller (then of the Public Health Service; later, president of the Health Physics Society) published an estimate that the average entrance dose per fluoroscopic examination was about 65 roentgens (650 mSv) at mid-century (Moeller 1953, pp.58-59).

The use of Thorotrast was discontinued by 1953.

2) The contrast studies are usually done for patients who are rather ill and may have multiple other disorders.
The cancers usually appear (as most cancers do) about 20 to 30 years later when the patients reach the "cancer" age. Because of this long lapse of cause and effect, all the studies are retrospective in nature.
And as you know, all retrospective studies are full of problems and inaccuracies.

3) A lot of these patients, have other disorders which may also lead to cancer like alcoholic cirrhosis and hepatitis B. In fact the first case of liver cancer I saw in Manchester was an old alcoholic with severe liver cirrhosis. But he also had Thorotrast contrast study more than 20 years earlier. Because of this history, the surgeon had to report him as a Thorotrast induced cancer.

4) With about 4 million by now old people, we are bound to come across a lot of cancer cases. So how many if any of these (taking into account all the above problems) are really caused by the radiation from the massive dose of intravenous Thorium-232... nobody can be really sure. If anybody says he can tell, then either he is lying or he does not know what he is saying.

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK) MRCP(London)
*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242


hwlooi said...

CONFUSION ON THE SPECIFIC ACTIVITY OF THORIUM-232 IN ONE OF THE LYNAS "WASTE" STREAM.....6.2 Bq/g or 62 Bq/g ?


It looks like a lot of people do not have even the basic knowledge of radioactivity concentrations and the various methods of calculating the specific activity of the radionuclides, especially of the series radionuclide.

There are essentially two ways of doing this, one is old fashioned way which use the total activity and the other is the modern currently in use and internationally accepted one and this uses only the concentration of the "mother" radionuclide.

Old method: "Since each atom of Thorium-232 decays into 11 other atoms of other radionuclides (12 atoms involved), each Bq of Thorium-232 had been assumed to be multiplied by a factor of 10 (10 because the end result Lead-208 is considered non-radioactive though this may not be true as it still has a half life of 19 million billion years, and Bismuth-212 decays either into Polonium-212 or to Thallium-208 both of which then decay into Lead-208..so Po-212 and Tl-208 can be considered as 1 Bq only)."

Quote: International Radiation Safety Expert Nick Tsurikov:

" On this basis, if a material contains 400 parts per million of thorium – its specific activity is calculated as follows:

a) Outdated method – 400 x 4.09 (specific activity of Th-232) x 10 (number of radio nuclides in the thorium decay chain) = 16,360 Bq/kg, or 16.4 Bq/g

b) International standard (IAEA, AELB and Australia) – 400 x 4.09 = 1,630 Bq/kg, or 1.64 Bq/g."
Unquote.

The Anti-Lynas folk is now using this old fashion way of looking at specific activity to confuse the people.

Because of all this, they claim that the Lynas "waste" is not 6.2 Bq/g but 62 Bq/g and Lynas has been misleading the people about the radioactivity.

The truth is that nobody, except some of the Chinese in China still use this non-standard way of looking at specific activity of a series radionuclide.

The old method has been discontinued internationally since about 1997.

Actually, when we use the standard description "Lynas waste has only 6.2 Bq/g", we have already factored in the radiation from all the daughter radionuclides.

For instance, all the dose coefficients given by IAEA of 0.39 microSv/hr/Bq/g for radiation at 1 metre from a pile of Thorium, and by UNSCEAR of 0.604 microSv/hr/Bq/gm for radiation dose from an infinite field of Thorium DEMANDS THAT WE USE THE STANDARD WAY OF DESCRIBING SPECIFIC ACTIVITY i.e. 1 Bq of activity in both a series or single non-series decay means 1 atom of the "mother" radionuclide decaying.

So as far as the dosage in terms of biological effects is concerned, whether we use the standard 6.2 Bq/g or the old Chinese way of 62 Bq/g to describe the radioactivity of the Lynas "waste", there is NO DIFFERENCE, as, if we were to use the old Chinese 62 Bq/g, we will have to divide the IAEA and UNSCEAR coefficients by a factor of 10.


Dato' Dr Looi
*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242

hwlooi said...

Quote:

"Odysess Sin Ner >>...........I am interested to know how does 64,000 tons/annum of acidic thorium will behave in a swampy, wet and leaky condition. Please do not divert the topic and talk about politics that thorium is not soluble. This is truly a coward act and deceiving saying. People is talking about fact but you are mentioning about politics. Oh ya... it is pricking your bone isn't it? Step up like a man and quench my keen to know as my statement says." Unquote

Answer:

The figure of 64,000 tons per year of Thorium alleged to be produced by the Lynas plant is too ridiculous to be true.

Let's see...

The Lynas ore from Mount Weld contains less than 1,600 ppm (parts per million of Thorium) so:

1,600 tons of Thorium = 1,000,000 tons of Ore.

64,000 tons of Thorium = 64,000 x 1 million divided by 1,600
= 40,000,000 tons of Ore !!

WHERE ON EARTH IS LYNAS GOING TO FIND THE SHIPS TO CARRY 40,000,000 TONS OF ORE PER YEAR FROM AUSTRALIA TO KUANTAN !!

IF A GIANT LORRY COULD CARRY 4 TONS, WE NEED 10,000,000 LORRY LOADS TO CARRY THE ORE FROM THE PORT TO THE PLANT !

THIS IS THE TYPE OF GROSS EXAGGERATION THAT IS VERY TYPICAL OF THE ANTI-LYNAS FOLK.


Actually, Lynas is expected to produce about 820,000 tons of WLP in the 1st 10 years of operation or 82,000 tons of WLP per year.

The WLP (Water Leached Purification) contains less than 1,600 ppm or 0.16 % of Thorium-232.

As such we would expect to get only 0.0016 x 82,000 tons of Thorium per year i.e.131 tons of Thorium per year AND NOT 64,000 TONS OF THORIUM PER YEAR !

This magical transformation of 131 tons of Thorium into 64,000 tons of Thorium reminds me of this joke:

"For normal people 1 + 1 = 2 but for those people in the Share Market 1 + 1 = 11,"

AND OF COURSE, FOR THE ANTI-LYNAS FOLK, 131 = 64,000 !


Dato' Dr Looi.
*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242

hwlooi said...

1. Malaysian Journal of Nuclear and Related Technology

THE ANNUAL DOSE RATE EXPOSURE FROM MALAYSIAN

CLAY BRICK HOUSE = 0.43 mSv/year

(215 x Lynas Worst Case Scenario)


2. SLEEPIN IN WOODEN HOUSE = 0.20 mSv/yr

(100x Lynas worst case)


3. SLAG BRICK AND GRANITE HOUSE = up to 2.0 mSv/yr

(1,000x Lynas worst case)


SO TO ALL ANTI-LYNAS FOLKS, YOU SHOULD PITCH UP A TENT NEXT TO THE LYNAS PLANT AND SEND YOUR ENTIRE FAMILY TO LIVE NEXT TO LYNAS AS THIS IS HUNDREDS OF TIMES LESS RADIOACTIVE THAN LIVING IN YOUR PRESENT WOODEN OR BRICK HOUSES !



Dato' Dr Looi
*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjT1kUAy_08&feature=player_detailpage

hwlooi said...

*
QUOTE Anti-Lynas Jade Lee: "When a few so claimed rare earth scientists came to Kuantan to speak about the safe rare earth processing, they were criticised and BOOED OUT OF TOWN IN SHAME" Unquote.

Answer:

THE THREE RARE EARTH SPECIALISTS FROM CHINA WHO WERE INVITED BY A FEW OF THE LOCAL ASSOCIATIONS TO ENLIGHTEN THE PEOPLE OF KUANTAN WERE RUDELY AND CRUDELY HARASSED BY THE SMSL LEADER AND HIS RED GUARDS IN A SHAMELESS AND DESPICABLE WAY.

THESE INNOCENT FOREIGN GUESTS WERE BEING BOOED, SHOUTED AT, JEERED, MOCKED, CRITICIZED, TERRORIZED AND DEGRADED BY THESE
DESPICABLE, UNCOUTH COMMON T^^GS WHO UNWITTINGLY DISPLAYED THEIR ABSOLUTE STUPIDITY FOR ALL TO SEE.

THIS TYPE OF BEHAVIOUR BRINGS SHAME TO ALL MALAYSIANS AND SHOULD BE STRONGLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY CONDEMNED.

THESE THREE POOR OLD CHINESE SCIENTISTS, TWO OF WHOM WERE IN THEIR 70'S, WITH YEARS OF VALUABLE EXPERIENCE, WERE FLABBERGASTED BY SUCH STUPID, CHILDISH, DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR.

THE USE OF SUCH THUGGERY UNEQUIVOCALLY CATEGORIZES THE USERS INTO THE LOWEST RUNG OF SOCIETY AND REFLECTS BADLY ON THEIR CHARACTER, INTELLIGENCE AND UPBRINGING !

BECAUSE OF THEIR BULLYING TACTIC, VERY FEW PEOPLE DARE TO SPEAK UP, AND ALL THOSE WHO DARE TO DO SO ARE BEING INTIMIDATED, HARASSED AND BOYCOTTED BY THESE ZOMBIES

May Our Good Lord Have Mercy on Their Souls.

Dr Looi.
*
*
http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242

Anonymous said...

As a water treatment engineer, you will understand why we opposed this so strongly. If you were to see and operate the waste water plant from a factory, you will know how poor our government is in putting a strict law management! In Singapore if the waste discharged could not meet the standard, it will be barred. Sadly to say, it does not happened in Malaysia always. Once the discharged goes into the river, it will somehow penetrate into the ground, into the fish and vege on your table. Tell me if the above guests do not have a water filter in our house? Will you drink the water supply from government? Actually, the municipal water treatment produced drinkable water, but again, due to the middle process which managed by certain companies. It became a nuisance. It is not the fact we could not accept Lynas, it is the mentality and the management that I cannot even trust!