Motegi Boycott

Discussion and debate about the MotoGP class
Rossifumi
Posts: 1466
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 8:50 pm

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by Rossifumi »

ipso wrote:
Kropotkin wrote:…All those gasoline fumes that we love so dearly - and which mechanics and riders spend an awful lot of time inhaling - contain benzene (with an e), a highly carcinogenic hydrocarbon molecule.
Two wrongs don’t make it right. (Although, I did enjoy your point earlier about the inability to take seriously someone in the paddock who chain-smokes, and then balks at going to Motegi.)
two wrongs don't make a right, that's true, but it does put the level of risk in to some context.

User avatar
ipso
Posts: 395
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 12:18 am
Location: Santa Monica, California

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by ipso »

Rossifumi wrote:
Domino wrote:
ipso wrote: ...I think of the Lobster-boil parable – and how humans are almost universally ignorant of the causes and gestation period of cancer. Most cancer is polygenic, and takes up to 20-25 years to develop ([1], [2]) - in a body that sheds all individual cells about every two years.
Bullshit!

What a load of utter bullshit. Cancer starts from damaged cells if they replenish themselves every two years how does it gestate for 20-25 years?

The cell in which the mutation initially occurred my have died but it will replicate and pass on the mutation.
That’s what I said - but better.

So you agree, that cancer transcends the life of single cells - that it's not bullshit.

Rossifumi
Posts: 1466
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 8:50 pm

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by Rossifumi »

ipso wrote: So you agree, that cancer transcends the life of single cells - that it's not bullshit.
A cancer-causing mutation will be passed on beyond the life-span of an individual cell, that much is true. Such mutations will increase the risk-factor for developing cancer but not necessarily lead to cancer in every individual carrying it though - different mutations carrying different risk factors. And it's not just mutations (changes in DNA sequence),changes in regulation of gene expression also carry risk factors.

User avatar
ipso
Posts: 395
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 12:18 am
Location: Santa Monica, California

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by ipso »

All things considered, what do you think the “extra” coefficient bump is Rossifumi? Say X+? in 1000, for cancer in a lifetime from a trip to Motegi as expected from the week surrounding October 2, 2011? Plus .000005?, plus .0005?, minus -.01? Take a SWAG. Make honest assumptions.

Would you take your two children on a week-long trip there – eating the local food – drinking the local water – breathing the local dust for a week (all-in, and carefree), just months and 150km from the second largest commercial nuclear disaster in history - an ongoing concern.

How much is “OK” for you and your children? How much do you trust the numbers authorities are giving? Do you really have zero reservations?

I’m not being hyperbolic, I’m being hard-curious. (Or is a child scenario unfair – and exempt - and any risk to adults negligible, and/or outside the boundary of realized risk in their lifetime?)

Or is the answer that “we just don’t know” – and thus you don’t know.

User avatar
Kropotkin
Site Admin
Posts: 3160
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 9:44 pm
Location: Dieren, The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by Kropotkin »

First up, I don't have kids, but my 2 cents anyway.
ipso wrote: Would you take your two children on a week-long trip there – eating the local food – drinking the local water – breathing the local dust for a week (all-in, and carefree), just months and 150km from the second largest commercial nuclear disaster in history - an ongoing concern.
Yes, I would. Would I choose Motegi (or Mito) as a holiday destination? No. Would I go on a business trip? Yes. BTW, Lorenzo turned down my request to take my wife...

ipso wrote: How much is “OK” for you and your children? How much do you trust the numbers authorities are giving? Do you really have zero reservations?
Reasonable risk is the only way I can quantify it. It's just an assessment.
Trust the numbers the authorities are giving? Most of the independent and crowdsourced numbers coming out of Japan fall within the margin of statistical significance of the numbers from the government. Which means if they are lying, they're not lying so badly it shows.
I'd have plenty of reservations about going to Japan. About the culture, the food, the language, my ability to cope. About the realistic chance that a really big earthquake will strike Tokyo and destroy the place, and I wouldn't be able to get out again. The Fukushima plant is not good, but in the grand scheme of things, it's pretty marginal.

My SWAG for the added risk of going to Motegi for a week is probably one in several million. I could get unlucky, but I think the odds of something else killing me before that is much greater. In the end, I expect to die of cancer, but as medical science advances, there is less and less to die from.

Anyway, as I said, the people in the paddock spend all of their working lives steeped in a benzene-rich environment. I would put the risk of that causing cancer as a couple of orders of magnitude greater than any exposure at Motegi.
--
http://www.motomatters.com/ - MotoGP News, Analysis and Race Reports

Rossifumi
Posts: 1466
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 8:50 pm

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by Rossifumi »

ipso wrote:All things considered, what do you think the “extra” coefficient bump is Rossifumi? Say X+? in 1000, for cancer in a lifetime from a trip to Motegi as expected from the week surrounding October 2, 2011? Plus .000005?, plus .0005?, minus -.01? Take a SWAG. Make honest assumptions.

Would you take your two children on a week-long trip there – eating the local food – drinking the local water – breathing the local dust for a week (all-in, and carefree), just months and 150km from the second largest commercial nuclear disaster in history - an ongoing concern.

How much is “OK” for you and your children? How much do you trust the numbers authorities are giving? Do you really have zero reservations?

I’m not being hyperbolic, I’m being hard-curious. (Or is a child scenario unfair – and exempt - and any risk to adults negligible, and/or outside the boundary of realized risk in their lifetime?)

Or is the answer that “we just don’t know” – and thus you don’t know.
Well according to the report by independent experts (and you have to trust that they are qualified to make these calculations) the risks associated with radioactive exposure by going to Motegi are not statistically significant. Also, the UK foreign office only warns against travel within 60km of Fukushima and they have no reason to protect Japanese interests over the safety of it's own citizens. If someone was prepared to stump up the cash then yes, I'd love to go to the Motegi motoGP.
I think what this boils down to is the understanding of 'risk'. Going to Motegi is not 'risk-free' but then nothing is - in the context of all risks we face and of all the exposure to ionising radiation that we all encounter, all credible information suggests that there is no significant, measurable risk associated with spending a week in Motegi as opposed to spending it in many other locations that motoGP visits. I also think it's probably fair to say that the predicted levels of cancer associated with Chernobyl, 3 Mile Island, Windscale, Nagasaki and Hiroshima have turned out to be over-estimates.

Domino
Posts: 315
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 6:47 pm

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by Domino »

Rossifumi wrote:
Domino wrote:
ipso wrote: ...I think of the Lobster-boil parable – and how humans are almost universally ignorant of the causes and gestation period of cancer. Most cancer is polygenic, and takes up to 20-25 years to develop ([1], [2]) - in a body that sheds all individual cells about every two years.
Bullshit!

What a load of utter bullshit. Cancer starts from damaged cells if they replenish themselves every two years how does it gestate for 20-25 years?

The cell in which the mutation initially occurred my have died but it will replicate and pass on the mutation.
Once the cell is damaged and begins to replicate it IS a cancerous tumor. Now if most of those take 20-25 years to develop, they are extremely slow growing and would actually not present much of a health hazard. The fact is cancer starts from one damaged cell, it becomes two, then four, then eight etc. It does not lie dormant for 20 years to then just surprise you...That aint how it works...

Rossifumi
Posts: 1466
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 8:50 pm

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by Rossifumi »

Domino wrote:
Once the cell is damaged and begins to replicate it IS a cancerous tumor. Now if most of those take 20-25 years to develop, they are extremely slow growing and would actually not present much of a health hazard. The fact is cancer starts from one damaged cell, it becomes two, then four, then eight etc. It does not lie dormant for 20 years to then just surprise you...That aint how it works...
as the cells in a tumour divide and the tumour grows the original cell that started the cancerous growth need not still be alive.
Mutations in cells can 'lay dormant' until further changes accumulate and cancerous growth starts

DJH
Posts: 177
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2011 8:54 am

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by DJH »

Yamaha just tweeted that both factory riders will be attending Motegi.

http://twitter.com/#!/YamahaMotoGP

User avatar
Gustav O
Posts: 2437
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 8:41 pm
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by Gustav O »

Just up on Yamaha Moto GPs Facebook page. Seems like Lorenzo has changed his mind.

yamahamotogp
We can confirm we WILL be racing in Motegi with both Ben and Jorge...running the special red and white 50th Anniversary livery!

Edit: Too slow, as usual. It´s only the ladies that think I am fast and I am not sure that is a good thing..

DJH
Posts: 177
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2011 8:54 am

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by DJH »

Gustav O wrote: Edit: Too slow, as usual. It´s only the ladies that think I am fast and I am not sure that is a good thing..
At least you reported on the livery. I'm shockingly lazy sometimes.

Ok, most of the time.

phil

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by phil »

www.yamaha-racing.com wrote:
Yamaha Factory Racing confirms full attendance at the Motegi GP running Yamaha's WGP50th Anniversary special livery.

Yamaha Factory Racing herewith confirms the attendance of its riders Jorge Lorenzo and Ben Spies to compete for round 15 of the 2011 MotoGP World Championship at Motegi in Japan on 2nd October.

The Yamaha Factory Racing team will race in Yamaha's WGP50th Anniversary red and white livery for the 4th time this year at the home GP of team owner Yamaha Motor Co., Ltd.

User avatar
Squidpuppet
Posts: 3924
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 9:14 pm
Location: CdA, ID

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by Squidpuppet »

phil wrote:
www.yamaha-racing.com wrote:

The Yamaha Factory Racing team will race in Yamaha's WGP50th Anniversary red and white livery for the 4th time this year at the home GP of team owner Yamaha Motor Co., Ltd.
Just use it all year, damnit! :ugeek:

Barristered
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 3:52 pm

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by Barristered »


redmike34
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 1:38 am
Location: Central Coast

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by redmike34 »

I ran across this on a completely unrelated website--can't vouch for authenticity, relevance, or even how old it is, since it's half in Japanese. If the guy that posted this is, in fact, Ludwik Kowalski, I'd guess it has some amount of legitimacy. The maps are interesting if nothing else...

http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/sho ... ight=japan

User avatar
Kropotkin
Site Admin
Posts: 3160
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 9:44 pm
Location: Dieren, The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by Kropotkin »

redmike34 wrote:I ran across this on a completely unrelated website--can't vouch for authenticity, relevance, or even how old it is, since it's half in Japanese. If the guy that posted this is, in fact, Ludwik Kowalski, I'd guess it has some amount of legitimacy. The maps are interesting if nothing else...

http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/sho ... ight=japan
Interesting. The radiation spread mainly to the northwest, whereas Motegi and Mito are in the southwest. Mostly very low doses, though, even the red dots are relatively low (over 19 microsieverts). Presumably, if they'd posted results in millisieverts, there would have been much less to see.
--
http://www.motomatters.com/ - MotoGP News, Analysis and Race Reports

Rossifumi
Posts: 1466
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 8:50 pm

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by Rossifumi »

there was a programme on BBC in the UK that I'd encourage everyone with an interest in this thread to try to watch somehow. Title was "Fukushima - is nuclear power safe?", presented by a professor in nuclear physics. There's a link below but it will only work for UK IP addresses ...although I guess it could well end up on Youtube or there may be a way that a computer literate person could find to view it from outside the UK?!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b014s49z

User avatar
ipso
Posts: 395
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 12:18 am
Location: Santa Monica, California

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by ipso »

I appreciate the thought/effort, but what a waste of 3 hours (slowwww feed to California, took forever, as the BBC media player is a POS for buffering.) But the content was even worse. So a nuclear physicist host and a Russian statesman tell us not to worry because only 15 people actually died out of 6,000 that got thyroid cancer from Chernobyl. Fuck off BBC! That was one of the most incompetent, ineffective, and unfocused cheap-ass productions I have ever seen on an important subject. I’ve seen more convincing posts on this forum.

The worst was his pronunciation; like to a 6 years old child who does not speak English natively. (Rate: 1 out of 5 stars)

Different format, but I still thought of this about every 90 seconds for the entire broadcast ^. Formulaic.



Kropotkin wrote:…Interesting. The radiation spread mainly to the northwest, whereas Motegi and Mito are in the southwest.
True. Best “proof” I’ve seen yet that Motegi might be OK.

Doing some recon I found this, which shows fallout resultant from decades of nuclear weapons testing in Nevada. Montreal has more to worry about than Los Angeles. It's all about the fallout.

Image

Rossifumi
Posts: 1466
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 8:50 pm

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by Rossifumi »

ipso wrote: So a nuclear physicist host and a Russian statesman tell us not to worry because only 15 people actually died out of 6,000 that got thyroid cancer from Chernobyl.
The presenter is a professor at the university of Surrey in the UK and also vice president of the Bristish Science Association with no connection to either the nuclear power industry or Japanese tourisms; he does have a long-standing professional reputation to protect though. The work regarding Chernobyl has been internationally peer reviewed. If you have better sourced or more credible info - not internet conspircy theories - then you should post it and add to the debate.
Out of interest, what source of information would convince you? is there anything that could change your view?
ipso wrote: Fuck off BBC!
This makes your case so much stronger....
ipso wrote: The worst was his pronunciation; like to a 6 years old child who does not speak English natively. (Rate: 1 out of 5 stars)
As a native English speaker I thought his English was fine.
"does not speak English like a native" by the way, a native English person wouldn't use 'natively'.

User avatar
ipso
Posts: 395
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 12:18 am
Location: Santa Monica, California

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by ipso »

Rossifumi wrote:The presenter is a professor at the university of Surrey in the UK and also vice president of the Bristish Science Association with no connection to either the nuclear power industry or Japanese tourisms; he does have a long-standing professional reputation to protect though. The work regarding Chernobyl has been internationally peer reviewed. ….
What does that have to do with me thinking it's a POS production? And he’s biased. Of course he’s biased. He is a nuclear physicist, a professor of nuclear physics, who states flatly “I’ve always believed that nuclear power is a good thing.” Then he goes on to try and dissuade the viewer from thinking Fukushima should even be used to judge the safety of nuclear power (an asinine suggestion, given the context, and the video he himself is showing); but the part that was over the line for me was the general summation (very slightly qualified) of Chernobyl as causing only 15 non-worker deaths in all this time.

Right as rain these nuclear catastrophes.
  • BBC guy wrote:…the containment process around the [Fukushima] reactor largely worked: most of the radiation was kept in, which is pretty remarkable for such an old and flawed reactor. And most importantly no one died, and there have been no associated radiation health risks so far.”
No “health risks”? Then why did he show us the exclusion zone, and put boots on to protect himself from radiation outside the exclusion zone?

Or the bit where he explained how radiation is in food, and plopped a few nuts in his mouth to show the children how nutritious radiation is.

Cigarettes (or radiation) do not cause immediate fish-flop death. Got it. You cannot argue his larger point. I guess I just expected more from a scientist of such reputed caliber.

The thing is, I completely condone nuclear energy. It’s cheap and obviously the future once fossil fuels roll off. It’s too bad Three Mile Island (and the movie The China Syndrome (1979) effectively destroyed public support for a US nuclear energy industry. We handed it over to the French, who now completely dominate that industry. I’m all for nuclear energy (and more high paying jobs.) I just don’t think we should play in the fallout after a disaster.

User avatar
tom
Posts: 614
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 8:07 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by tom »

I think that looking beyond the immediate fears, if the effect of the radiation leakage from Fukushima turns out to be not significant outside the immediate vicinity of the reactors then the incident in a perverse way helps the nuclear energy argument.

One of the biggest earthquakes to hit one of the most active and highly populated regions + a direct impact form a 10m tsunami which caused complete failure of the cooling system which resulted in at least partial meltdown of 3 reactors was relatively successfully contained by a 20-30 year old design.

To me that is a pretty good advertisement for nuclear power... just not in a geologically active region, susceptible to tsunamis :)

Rossifumi
Posts: 1466
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 8:50 pm

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by Rossifumi »

ipso wrote: And he’s biased. Of course he’s biased. He is a nuclear physicist, a professor of nuclear physics, who states flatly “I’ve always believed that nuclear power is a good thing.”
he's an independent academic, he has no connection to the nuclear power industry and no reason to be part of giant cover-up of the risks of nuclear power. He does state his view but I guess he based that view on an understanding of the issue gleaned from decades of experience in the field of nuclear physics and from seeing credible, peer-reviewed studies. If you think all nuclear physicists are inherently biased then who would you turn to for an unbiased, objective view? motorcycle racers? anyone as long as they agree with your view?....

ipso wrote: but the part that was over the line for me was the general summation (very slightly qualified) of Chernobyl as causing only 15 non-worker deaths in all this time.
This was the findings of an internationally peer-reviewed study. The World Health Organization has also published a report on the after effects of Chernobyl (are they biased too?) which can be found here
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factshee ... index.html
and includes the following finding:
"Ionizing radiation is a known cause of certain types of leukaemia (a malignancy of blood cells). An elevated risk of leukaemia was first found among the survivors of the atomic bombings in Japan some two to five years after exposure. Recent investigations suggest a doubling of the incidence of leukaemia among the most highly exposed Chernobyl liquidators. No such increase has been clearly demonstrated among children or adults resident in any of the contaminated areas. "

ipso wrote: Right as rain these nuclear catastrophes.
He actually described the 6000 thyroid cancers and 50 deaths as 'a human tragedy'.

ipso wrote:
  • BBC guy wrote:…the containment process around the [Fukushima] reactor largely worked: most of the radiation was kept in, which is pretty remarkable for such an old and flawed reactor. And most importantly no one died, and there have been no associated radiation health risks so far.”
No “health risks”? Then why did he show us the exclusion zone, and put boots on to protect himself from radiation outside the exclusion zone?
e
I don't recall him saying there were 'no risks' but did say that they have not been proved to be as high as we all - nuclear physicists included - believed (using Chernobyl to exemplify this).


ipso wrote: Or the bit where he explained how radiation is in food, and plopped a few nuts in his mouth to show the children how nutritious radiation is.
He was explaining that it was ubiquitous and that we all get exposure all the time without ill-effect.

ipso wrote: Cigarettes (or radiation) do not cause immediate fish-flop death. Got it. You cannot argue his larger point. I guess I just expected more from a scientist ="ipso"]of such reputed caliber.
High levels of exposure do cause immediate deaths, something he explained with reference to the workers trying to contain Chernobyl. The long-term effects were discussed with reference to Chernobyl - no one can know for sure what will happen long-term as a result of Fukushima but Chernobyl is a good point of reference.

User avatar
ipso
Posts: 395
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 12:18 am
Location: Santa Monica, California

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by ipso »

Rossifumi wrote:…no one can know for sure what will happen long-term as a result of Fukushima but Chernobyl is a good point of reference.
Rossifumi I agree with this statement 100%. :D

JoeKing
Posts: 136
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:08 am

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by JoeKing »

tom wrote:I think that looking beyond the immediate fears, if the effect of the radiation leakage from Fukushima turns out to be not significant outside the immediate vicinity of the reactors then the incident in a perverse way helps the nuclear energy argument.

One of the biggest earthquakes to hit one of the most active and highly populated regions + a direct impact form a 10m tsunami which caused complete failure of the cooling system which resulted in at least partial meltdown of 3 reactors was relatively successfully contained by a 20-30 year old design.

To me that is a pretty good advertisement for nuclear power... just not in a geologically active region, susceptible to tsunamis :)

I had the same thought after the hysteria died down after the 3 Mile Island incident here in the States in 1979. Unfortunately, these sentiments were not held by the US public. End result..not a single nuclear plant has been built since 1979 & numerous plans were cancelled.

Never underestimate the power of fear of..the "Devils power". :twisted:

User avatar
RedJet
Posts: 380
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 6:58 am
Location: Here I is! Where you was?

Re: Motegi Boycott

Post by RedJet »

Just saw this, lovely title.

Typhoon Roke on Track for Leaking Nuke Plant

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-2 ... plant.html

Typhoon Roke brought evacuation orders and fears of floods to Nagoya city in central Japan today as it approached the main island of Honshu on a course toward the crippled Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant..../ ...

The eye of Roke, categorized as “strong” by the agency, was about 928 kilometers (575 miles) southwest of Tokyo at 3 p.m. local time today. It was packing wind speeds of 144 kilometers per hour (89 miles), with gusts of 216 kilometers per hour.

The typhoon, moving northeast at 15 kilometers per hour, is forecast to take three days to pass over Japan and its storm warning area is due to cover most of the country in that time, according to the meteorological agency’s website.

Japan Airlines Co. canceled 49 domestic flights today as of 6 p.m. because of the typhoon, according to the company’s website.
Hope Bridgestone is ready with those wets...
And all should have Geiger's at the ready. And surfboards...

Post Reply