When you decide that you don’t care it gives you your power back.

It sounds to me like people misunderstood what she was saying, and because it was Ann Coulter leapt on the first explanation that occurred to them. “She must be saying that unlimited amounts of radiation are safe. How crazy!” But is it any crazier than the implication that unlimitedly tiny doses of radiation must be deadly dangerous?

Of course, low doses are exactly what are being experienced by the Japanese population, so Ann’s observation seems more relevant in context. Compared to everything else they’re experiencing – like freezing weather with no electricity – should the tiny risk of radiation really be their top priority? What the global media are getting most excited about?

Amused by the comment about the deadliness of water – it reminded me of this.

Not just bad, it can actually be fatal. There was a case in Sacramento a few years ago where someone died as the result of a water-drinking contest (Hold your wee for a Wii”) sponsored by a radio station.

However, without wishing attribute credibility to Ann Coulter in any way other than sheer accident, it does seem that there’s overwhelming evidence that the LNT model of radiation exposure is incorrect. And if it is correct, why do so few anti-nuclear types complain about the radiation emitted by coal-fired power plants?

http://chemistry.about.com/cs/5/f/blwaterintox.htm

of course it’s not just how much, it’s over what period of time.