A truly worthy and defendable human endeavor does not require \"PR\" to make it palatable; \"PR\" is only necessary to fool the consumer into making a choice they might not otherwise make…or to salve the consciences of those who peddle a dangerous device, and use \"spin\" as a form of willful ignorance of what could be at stake.

What gives you the right to decide what risks can be unilaterally imposed upon thousands, even millions of innocent persons living dozens, or even hundreds of miles down-wind from a nuclear power mishaps? That right does not exist if you cannot guarantee that no harm will come to them (you cannot), or can guarantee to make each of those persons 100% whole again following such a mishap (again, you cannot).

What gives you the right to declare that some arbitrary level of radioactive contamination is `acceptable\’ for other millions of people who must rely on plant or animal foods from areas tainted by radiation releases?

What gives you the right to decree that whole swaths of land may be rendered uninhabitable for generations by human folly or blunder or greed. What gives you the right to condemn future generations of entire family lines to the terror of not knowing whether- or when some cells in their bodies - or in the bodies of their children…or children\’s-children - will suddenly mutate & turn cancerous?.

And what gives you the right to decide that others should risk death by radiation-incepted cancer, as long as you can win your \"PR War\"? If you are so eager to witness what happens to human cells in the face of radiation, I’m sure TEPCO is short of volunteers to work at their `ground zero’. At least THAT would be risk of true choice.

You do not appear to have the wisdom to realize that just because mankind CAN tinker with forces beyond our true controlling, that we somehow have the right to TRY it, anyway - regardless of the potential consequences.

I recommend a (re)reading of Mary Shelley\’s \"Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus\".

Perhaps the publicity given toward nuclear is a blessing to be leveraged by the profession and industry if handled properly.

Last Tuesday (3/22/11) the Northeastern Section of the American Nuclear Society held a meeting with Meredith Angwin of Vermont as speaker. Meredith spoke on her approach to nuclear advocacy. She and Howard Shaffer were featured in the February Nuclear News. Howard leads the ANS Vermont Initiative. Meredith\’s presentation would be useful to others supporting nuclear power. She is found online at the Ethan Allan Institute.

Also at the meeting was David Tropeik. David is a journalist, instructor at Harvard, and the author of \"How Risky Is It, Really? Why Our Fears Don’t Always Match the Facts\" David suggests that facts will not be heard by non scientists /engineers because there are different parts of the brain that process facts and fears. He suggested a different approach to dealing with the fears of the public created by Fukushima Daiichi. I have not read his book but will. Based on David\’s comments at the ANS meeting, I think his book should be read and his advice considered by the nuclear industry PR people.