Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, February 18, 2019

Grand Canyon tourists exposed for years to radiation in museum building, safety manager says -- For nearly two decades at the Grand Canyon, tourists, employees, and children on tours passed by three paint buckets stored in the National Park's museum collection building, unaware that they were being exposed to radiation. Although federal officials learned last year that the five-gallon containers were brimming with uranium ore, then removed the radioactive specimens, the park's safety director alleges nothing was done to warn park workers or the public that they might have been exposed to unsafe levels of radiation.

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

In a rogue email sent to all Park Service employees on Feb. 4, Elston "Swede" Stephenson -- the safety, health and wellness manager -- described the alleged cover-up as "a top management failure" and warned of possible health consequences.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

unaware that they were being exposed to radiation

This is what happens when Amreekans keep standing in front of their microwaves watching the tray go round and round .... can no longer tell if they are getting nuked....

#1 | Posted by J_Tremain at 2019-02-19 12:14 AM | Reply

#1 | POSTED BY J_TREMAIN

tRump will save us all from the NK microwave ovens

#2 | Posted by 1947steamer at 2019-02-19 07:15 AM | Reply

We live on a radioactive rock in direct exposure by an unshielded nuclear furnace. Deal with it.

#3 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-02-19 09:03 AM | Reply

If that isn't sarcasm, you're an idiot.

If it is... you're still an idiot.

#4 | Posted by J_Tremain at 2019-02-19 09:04 AM | Reply

4 for 2 ....

#5 | Posted by J_Tremain at 2019-02-19 09:05 AM | Reply

#5 | POSTED BY J_TREMAIN

keyboard halitosis...goat c um on your breath. quit goin' down on GRACIE and then posting before you gargle

#6 | Posted by 1947steamer at 2019-02-19 09:46 AM | Reply

Grey Magic.

#7 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2019-02-19 10:12 AM | Reply

Navajos used to refer to it as grey magic because sometimes people would get sick when exposed to uranium and would turn grey as they died.

$#!t happens.

#8 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2019-02-19 10:18 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Eh it's a slow decaying alpha emitter.

Unless you were standing literally right over the open bucket you probably weren't getting exposed at all.

#9 | Posted by jpw at 2019-02-19 10:40 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

How much radation? Ever been in an airplane? Look it up.

#10 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-02-19 10:52 AM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

"How much radation[sic]?"

How about you read the article if you're actually curious? It states that "the radiation readings exceed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's safe limits." It goes on to state:

One of the buckets was so full that its lid would not close...the containers were stored next to a taxidermy exhibit, where children on tours sometimes stopped for presentations, sitting next to uranium for 30 minutes or more. By his calculation, those children could have received radiation dosages in excess of federal safety standards within three seconds, and adults could have suffered dangerous exposure in less than a half-minute.

#11 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-19 10:59 AM | Reply

JPW may have effectively killed this thread.

#12 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-02-19 11:25 AM | Reply

The tourists had such short term exposure that I doubt if there's a problem. But I'd sure be concerned if I had worked near the stuff for an extended period.

#13 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2019-02-19 12:30 PM | Reply

Bigger threat hiking down the trail without enough water.

#14 | Posted by LesWit at 2019-02-19 12:57 PM | Reply

So nobody read the article? Or they just disagree with it? If so on what basis?

#15 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-19 01:36 PM | Reply

We live on a radioactive rock in direct exposure by an unshielded nuclear furnace. Deal with it.

#3 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-02-19 09:03 AM | Reply | Flag:

If that isn't sarcasm, you're an idiot.

If it is... you're still an idiot.

#4 | Posted by J_Tremain

If you don't know that you are agoat guy moron and not just a goat guy..

#16 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-02-19 04:37 PM | Reply

One of the buckets was so full that its lid would not close...the containers were stored next to a taxidermy exhibit, where children on tours sometimes stopped for presentations, sitting next to uranium for 30 minutes or more. By his calculation, those children could have received radiation dosages in excess of federal safety standards within three seconds, and adults could have suffered dangerous exposure in less than a half-minute.

#11 | Posted by JOE

Having worked at a nuclear facility for over 18 years, I find that hard to believe. There is no way ore is giving enough radiation to exceed the limit in 3 hours, let alone 3 seconds.

#17 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-02-19 04:41 PM | Reply

Sniper worked at Hanford?

Your tax dollars at work, ladies and gentlemen!

#18 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-19 04:46 PM | Reply

Do any of you realize how long you would have to stand on a bucket of ore to get 500 mR per year above the 300 mR limit of natural radiation plus medical radation. The person that wrote the article had their head in the clouds and didn't have a clue.

The maximum permissible exposure for a person under 18 working with radiation is one-tenth the adult limit or not to exceed 500 millirems per year above the 300+ millirems of natural sources, plus medical radiation.

#19 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-02-19 04:47 PM | Reply

We live on a radioactive rock in direct exposure by an unshielded nuclear furnace. Deal with it.

#3 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

How are we unshielded?

We have a magnetic field and an atmosphere above us, and a ---- ton of dirt beneath us.

#20 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-19 04:52 PM | Reply

So nobody read the article? Or they just disagree with it? If so on what basis?

#15 | Posted by JOE

I would like to know how he estimated the exposures (distance from source, open bucket ect).

I base my skepticism on the fact that the uranium decay cascade is a series of alpha (helium nucleus) and beta (electron) decays. Having worked extensively with both alpha and beta emitters, I know that shielding with plastic (clear plexiglass in my case) completely protects the user. So if it's in a bucket, the plastic is going to shield most of it.

Add to that the fact that exposure is calculated by the inverse squared rule, exposure danger falls over rapidly as you move away from the source.

Finally, it's ore, which means low concentrations of radioactive materials.

Add it all together and you have shielded, low concentration material that was probably some distance away from the people who are potentially being exposed.

#21 | Posted by jpw at 2019-02-19 04:53 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Is Sniper Homer Simpson?

#22 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-02-19 04:53 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Uranium is radio active, but it isn't that radioactive. In reality, you have a much better chance of getting caner from Radon gas in your basement or up through your concrete slab, rather than the limited exposure in a museum for a couple of hours. If you have a newer home, have that checked. They are almost air tight.

#23 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-02-19 05:15 PM | Reply

Sniper worked at Hanford?

Your tax dollars at work, ladies and gentlemen!

#18 | Posted by snoofy

Is that the only one your little brain knows of?

#24 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-02-20 10:29 AM | Reply

How are we unshielded?

We have a magnetic field and an atmosphere above us, and a ---- ton of dirt beneath us.

#20 | Posted by IndianaJones

If you think any of that shields you, you are goofy.

#25 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-02-20 10:30 AM | Reply

Is Sniper Homer Simpson?

#22 | Posted by IndianaJones

No, but you are a m*****.

#26 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-02-20 10:32 AM | Reply

I know that shielding with plastic (clear plexiglass in my case) completely protects the user. So if it's in a bucket, the plastic is going to shield most of it.

One of the buckets was so full its lid wouldn't close. Would that make a difference?

#27 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-20 10:34 AM | Reply

OK, the actual danger of Uranium ore is breathing the dust. That is what will give you lung cancer. Unless those container were disturbed there wasn't much danger. This is starting to look like a campaign for a class action law suit. A tort lawyer's wet dream.

#28 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-02-20 11:04 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

"OK, the actual danger of Uranium ore is breathing the dust"

I suggest you study the Uranium Decay Chain before speaking so ignorantly.

#29 | Posted by NerfHerder at 2019-02-20 11:14 AM | Reply

#29 | Posted by NerfHerder I am not a nuclear scientist but I had to go to a special weapons school. Good U ore is about 2% U metal. That stuff is not enriched. I handled a lot of DU ammo, The stuff is not that radio active. It become dangerous down range after the DU burns and become a dust.

#30 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-02-20 11:22 AM | Reply

#27 I know it's an unsatisfying answer but it depends.

If it sits on top but unsealed, probably not a major issue.

If it's got significant openings? Could be, but again it's then a matter of how close you are to it and for how long.

I'd still doubt that that would be enough to get you in the realm of a year's worth of safe exposure. It probably doesn't even come close to the exposure the tourists received while flying to Arizona.

#31 | Posted by jpw at 2019-02-20 11:42 AM | Reply

Also, I typed #21 hastily and dropped lingo without explaining what it meant.

The reason why particle emissions are less of an issue is they don't penetrate tissue very well on account that they're comparatively large and charged. Alpha particles can be blocked by a piece of paper and barely penetrate the outer skin. Beta particles make it a little bit further and require more shielding like plastics.

As mentioned, the real danger is inhalation or ingestion of the particles, which isn't an issue if the buckets were undisturbed.

Was it a ridiculously stupid oversight? Of course. But not one warranting USA Today publishing a "Radiation Exposure, 6 Things You Need to Know" article.

#32 | Posted by jpw at 2019-02-20 11:48 AM | Reply

We have a magnetic field and an atmosphere above us, and a ---- ton of dirt beneath us.

#20 | POSTED BY INDIANAJONES AT 2019-02-19 04:52 PM | REPLY: thank god for dirt to protect us from radiation, oh, wait..... A naturally occurring radioactive gas that can cause lung cancer: RADON

#33 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-02-20 01:38 PM | Reply

OK guys, Seriously, if you are concerned about radiation exposure, anywhere you have a slab on the ground, you will have Radon. It is a leading cause of caner from radiation. You will not be exposed to much radiation unless you work in mining, the oil field, run large coal fired power plants or work in nuclear medicine or nuclear power plants.

#34 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-02-20 01:58 PM | Reply

#32 | Posted by jpw

There is one more particle you left out. It is the dangerous one.

#35 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-02-20 04:48 PM | Reply

#34 | Posted by docnjo

Or play with colman lantern mantles all the time.

#36 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-02-20 04:50 PM | Reply

35 you're not referring to the gamma emission are you?

#37 | Posted by jpw at 2019-02-20 06:48 PM | Reply

I know there's neutron emission but didn't think that was as dangerous owing to its lack of charge.

#38 | Posted by jpw at 2019-02-20 06:49 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort