#213153 - 12/16/10 12:00 PM
Latest US Government advice on surviving nukes
|
Veteran
Registered: 12/12/04
Posts: 1204
Loc: Nottingham, UK
|
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/16/science/16terror.htmlExtract: The new wave is citizen preparedness. For people who survive the initial blast, the main advice is to fight the impulse to run and instead seek shelter from lethal radioactivity. Even a few hours of protection, officials say, can greatly increase survival rates. [...] “Public education is key,” Daniel J. Kaniewski, a security expert at George Washington University, said in an interview. “But it’s easier for communities to buy equipment — and look for tech solutions — because there’s Homeland Security money and no shortage of contractors to supply the silver bullet.”
There are some detailed statistics and suggestions which make the article worth reading.
_________________________
Quality is addictive.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#213154 - 12/16/10 12:46 PM
Re: Latest US Government advice on surviving nukes
[Re: Brangdon]
|
Pooh-Bah
Registered: 11/25/08
Posts: 1918
Loc: Washington, DC
|
Very interesting article, Brangdon, thanks.
I'd be less fatalistic about it if I lived elsewhere. Maybe I'll check the expiration date on my potassium iodide tablets.
Administration officials argue that the cold war created an unrealistic sense of fatalism about a terrorist nuclear attack. “It’s more survivable than most people think,” said an official deeply involved in the planning, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “The key is avoiding nuclear fallout.”
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#213157 - 12/16/10 01:28 PM
Re: Latest US Government advice on surviving nukes
[Re: Dagny]
|
Geezer
Registered: 06/02/06
Posts: 5357
Loc: SOCAL
|
Very interesting article, Brangdon, thanks.
I'd be less fatalistic about it if I lived elsewhere. Maybe I'll check the expiration date on my potassium iodide tablets.
Administration officials argue that the cold war created an unrealistic sense of fatalism about a terrorist nuclear attack. “It’s more survivable than most people think,” said an official deeply involved in the planning, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “The key is avoiding nuclear fallout.”
. . . says an informed inhabitant of Ground Zero. Part of my nuclear preparedness plan is to avoid likely target rich environments: NYC, Washington DC . . . Los Angeles . .
_________________________
Better is the Enemy of Good Enough. Okay, what’s your point??
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#213159 - 12/16/10 01:58 PM
Re: Latest US Government advice on surviving nukes
[Re: Brangdon]
|
Pooh-Bah
Registered: 09/15/05
Posts: 2485
Loc: California
|
I have said the same thing about "dirty bombs" in the past, too. (A dirty bomb does not necessarily require a nuclear detonation.) Then the logic about hunkering down to let the wind dissipate the radioactivity instead of immediately fleeing still applies in both cases.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#213168 - 12/16/10 03:26 PM
Re: Latest US Government advice on surviving nukes
[Re: Brangdon]
|
Veteran
Registered: 07/23/08
Posts: 1502
Loc: Mesa, AZ
|
Hey! Wasn't there a Nat Geo doc on surviving a nuclear attack that showed earlier this year? It went over this same stuff about staying out of the fallout by being in a building and as far inside as possible to avoid latent radiation. It was for like 24-36 hours.
_________________________
Don't just survive. Thrive.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#213176 - 12/16/10 04:25 PM
Re: Latest US Government advice on surviving nukes
[Re: Brangdon]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 08/03/07
Posts: 3078
|
The information is all rather old hat I'm afraid. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEXD-_O_MpY(although I can't see the UK authorities today being so organised considering the recent poor weather) If you do decide to move quickly (assuming the heat and blast wave hasn't turned you to toast) its best to traverse 90 degrees perpendicular to the prevailing wind direction assuming of course you have a secure bug out location to head towards and can stay there in the fall out shelter for 14 days without resupply.
Edited by Am_Fear_Liath_Mor (12/16/10 04:27 PM)
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#213226 - 12/17/10 09:59 AM
Re: Latest US Government advice on surviving nukes
[Re: Brangdon]
|
Stranger
Registered: 09/07/10
Posts: 12
Loc: Wilmington, NC
|
I live so close to a major military base, the only thing that I see will be the flash. Kind of a moot point- I am much more concerned with hurricanes and tornados.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#213231 - 12/17/10 01:25 PM
Re: Latest US Government advice on surviving nukes
[Re: Brangdon]
|
Geezer
Registered: 06/02/06
Posts: 5357
Loc: SOCAL
|
Don't confuse surviving a (singular) nuke with surviving nukes (plural) as in nuclear war . . very big difference.
_________________________
Better is the Enemy of Good Enough. Okay, what’s your point??
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#213248 - 12/17/10 06:55 PM
Re: Latest US Government advice on surviving nukes
[Re: Brangdon]
|
Old Hand
Registered: 11/10/03
Posts: 710
Loc: Augusta, GA
|
.... and if one goes off, the ENTIRE world will be on edge. Something else to think about. I remember hearing through rumor that a number of world military forces went to their highest level of readiness after 9/11 because no one knew what the U.S. would do. I'm not trying to start a political or TEOTWAWKI argument, just pointing out that something like this has far reaching consequences. You may find our "just in time" inventory model being "out of time".
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 registered (Ren, chaosmagnet),
499
Guests and
10
Spiders online. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|