Mythbusters to Test Cockroach Radiation Myth 573
redwoodtree writes "An article on the site for the Tri-City Herald sums it up perfectly: 'Contrary to popular belief, not a significant amount of research goes into cockroach radiation.' To test the old saw about 'the cockroaches being the only survivors of a nuclear war' Discovery Channel's Mythbusters are going out to Hanford Site, where plutonium was manufactured for the first nuclear bomb. It's the single most polluted nuclear waste site in the U.S. The Mythbusters are going to take cockroaches and other insects and apply successively higher doses of radiation in a controlled setting."
I thought it was for a different reason (Score:5, Interesting)
Nukes? Cockroaches are dead even w/o radiation (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Safety? (Score:5, Interesting)
Gamma irradiator. Basically, big lead tube with a gamma source inside. You can't get it out. You can't expose the source to the outside world. There is a lead "airlock". You put the roach inside. Irradiate. Release. I went to a High School that had a gamma irradiator. We DID this experiment. Exposed roach to greater than 1000, but less than 10000 roentgens. We weren't real precise. But the roach lived long enough for us to decide we better squish it before it reproduced.
Oh, yes, "stuff doesn't glow when you expose it to radiation". Not 100% true. Some stuff DOES. Namely most crystals. One of the most impressive examples is Sodium Chloride. Yep, table salt. Irradiate it overnight. The gamma rays knock the electrons up to a higher energy level. But since salt has a very tight crystaline structure, they don't snap back down immediatly. Remove from irradiator, and over the course of the next 24 hours, it glows pretty brightly (bright as a glow stick) in a funky red-orange light (spectra of sodium). Eventually all the electrons snap back down to their ground state and it quits glowing. Not radioactive at any point while this is going on. The only thing it emits is red-orange photons which are not "radiation" by most people's standards. (Well it is, but ALL light is...)
Re:Call from PETA in ... 3, 2, 1 (Score:5, Interesting)
But really the question is not that simple. Would you savagely murder one fluffy dog to save 100M people from a deadly virus? Would you savagely murder one human to save 100M people from a deadly virus? Would you savagely murder 1M humans to save 100M people from a deadly virus? Where is your threshold? I believe this is what Protectors of the Ringworld couldn't wrap their mind about.
From Caltech via the Wayback Machine (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Suffer the little creatures (Score:5, Interesting)
I heard an interview once with a scientist who wanted "endangered species" to include the less cuddly critters. He cited the fact that when the last surviving California condors were captured for breeding, the first thing that was done to them was a delousing. It never occurred to anybody that if a species is endangered, then their parasites must be endangered as well.
Re:Call from PETA in ... 3, 2, 1 (Score:2, Interesting)
Just because some cockroaches survive (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Safety? (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe it isn't now, but I had friends working for Bechtel, who were doing radiochemical testing of natural ponds to try and figure out which one was going to go critical *first*. I'm not joking or exaggerating: there was so much leaked radioactive material on/in the ground that they expected it to concentrate through natural drainage to above critical mass. One friend told me about several of the criticality incidents they had, where waste plutonium had accumulated in oil-filled coolant ducts and started thermal runaway reactions (that boiled all the oil, displacing all the plutonium chips, which then settled back down to start the cycle again...) So while Hanford might be okay now, I wouldn't go there unless I was with someone who had worked there a long, long time. That's the only place I've ever visited where they gave me a heavy steel tag with a number stamped on it, for rugged identification, along with the film badge.
Re:Safety? (Score:4, Interesting)
I've done this (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Sorry... (Score:2, Interesting)
He reforms in 15 minutes, and *now* he's radioactive.
Why does the first post is *ALWAYS* funny? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Safety? (Score:3, Interesting)
And the cooling water in a reactor...
rj
Re:Dude! (Score:3, Interesting)
(insert your-mom or genetic-mutant joke here)
Re:Safety? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Not studied? (Score:1, Interesting)
Dr Karl lifts the vocabulary and omits the data... good journalism.
Re:Safety? (Score:3, Interesting)
I remember people talking about this back when I worked there, and some of them were actually around when it happened.
It's actually very simple (Score:3, Interesting)
However, after a nuclear blast, the fallout would be a source of constant radiation and would probably kill any roaches that had to live in it for a week or two.
Re:Safety? (Score:5, Interesting)
Novel means of killing cock roaches (Score:3, Interesting)
Try it, its pretty amazing.