Penn & Teller Ouija Board part 1. The Cochrane Collaboration | Working together to provide the best evidence for health care. Coal Ash Is More Radioactive than Nuclear Waste. The popular conception of nuclear power is straight out of The Simpsons: Springfield abounds with signs of radioactivity, from the strange glow surrounding Mr. Burn's nuclear power plant workers to Homer's low sperm count. Then there's the local superhero, Radioactive Man, who fires beams of "nuclear heat" from his eyes. Nuclear power, many people think, is inseparable from a volatile, invariably lime-green, mutant-making radioactivity. Coal, meanwhile, is believed responsible for a host of more quotidian problems, such as mining accidents, acid rain and greenhouse gas emissions. But it isn't supposed to spawn three-eyed fish like Blinky. Over the past few decades, however, a series of studies has called these stereotypes into question.
At issue is coal's content of uranium and thorium, both radioactive elements. Fly ash uranium sometimes leaches into the soil and water surrounding a coal plant, affecting cropland and, in turn, food. In a 1978 paper for Science, J. The U.S. 3,000 mile myth. Oil being drained from a car. The 3,000 mile myth refers to a common belief, particularly in the United States, that all cars should have their motor oil changed at least every 3,000 miles (4,800 km) to maintain their car engine correctly.
Efforts are under way to convince the public that this is not necessary, and that people should follow the advice given in their owner's manual rather than the advice of the oil-change businesses.[1] History[edit] At the beginning of the twentieth century, many car manufacturers recommended an oil use duration of 500 miles (800 km) to 2,000 miles (3,200 km). With the advent of oil filters in the 1920s and their popularization later on, car manufacturers extended the oil use duration up to 3,000 miles.
Reasons[edit] This recently identified "myth" has continued to exist due to the complexity existing in today's car industry. References[edit] External links[edit] Revisiting the Myth of The 12-Year Old McDonald's Burger That Just Won't Rot (Testing Results!) More tests, more results! Follow The Food Lab on Facebook or Twitter. [Photographs: J. Kenji Lopez-Alt] A few weeks back, I started an experiment designed to prove or disprove whether or not the magic, non-decomposing McDonald's hamburgers that have been making their way around the internet are indeed worthy of disgust or even interest.
By way of introduction, allow myself to quote myself. This is from my previous article: Back in 2008, Karen Hanrahan, of the blog Best of Mother Earth posted a picture of a hamburger that she uses as a prop for a class she teaches on how to help parents keep their children away from junk food... The problem with coming to that conclusion, of course, is that if you are a believer in science (and I certainly hope you are!) Thus far, I haven't located a single source that treats this McDonald's hamburger phenomenon in this fashion. The Theory Behind the Burger Things we know so far: There's mold everywhere. Frankly, I'm glad this damn experiment is over. Integrative Medicine and Credibility. John C McLachlan, professor of medical education Author Affiliations j.c.mclachlan@durham.ac.uk So called integrative medicine should not be used as a way of smuggling alternative practices into rational medicine by way of lowered standards of critical thinking.
Failure to detect an obvious hoax is not an encouraging sign It is a common, and rarely unsuccessful, ploy to change the name of something unpleasant in order to give it greater acceptability. However, changing the name of Windscale nuclear plant to Sellafield after an accident in 1981 made it no less radioactive, and the new name quickly acquires all the connotations of the old Increasing concern has been expressed about the presence of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) on the NHS. It is sometimes possible to test the status of a notion (the terms hypothesis and theory should be reserved for ideas that are related to at least some form of evidence) by a process of opposition.