AnnaMariaS wrote:

Therefore, any increase in radioisotopes, even in amounts that are not above "background" can still cause MORE people to get cancer, when they may normally not have gotten cancer. It is all about probability.
....
A recent paper shows that even background solar radiation (which makes up about 20-30% of the normal "background" radiation that we are exposed to), seems to be correlated with cancer related deaths.
I would never dispute that radiation is, in general, unhealthy. This is simply a fact. I had been questioning whether the scale of the disaster was as big as people had been saying, but after recent reports I'm quite willing to admit I was wrong and this could very well be an enormously significant problem. Do I believe that the death toll will be anywhere near that of Chernobyl? I believe strongly that it won't, but I've been wrong before (many times) and I could very well be wrong again.

As a scientific researcher, can you correct me on the following impression I've been given by bad science reporting? "On the topic of cancer, it seems that as one ages the probability of acquiring cancer approaches 1. While the risks can be reduced by a healthy diet, not smoking, not going outdoors in daylight, not using cellphones, not breathing air in cities or highly populated countries, and so on, it's sadly a fact of life right now. The list of things that cannot cause cancer is probably smaller than the list of things which can." I'm probably wrong about this. I hope.
AnnaMariaS wrote:
Moreover, it is IMPOSSIBLE to build enough nuclear plants (not enough space, money, time, or material) to actually provide the amount of energy that the world's population are projected to consume
True.
AnnaMariaS wrote:
It seems like alternatives that will not lead to cancer and death seem to be a smart direction to move!
Of course. What do you have in mind, though? Biofuel causes similar rates of pollutants, solar energy, hydroelectric, geothermal (which has its own environmental problems), and wind power aren't going to come close either. I guess the only solution at this point is to reduce energy consumption in general?