5 ms·
The cases per year are going down and the average age of diagnosis is 69. So you are right in that most of this is legacy. But we know now and knew then that
by nemacol 8y ago
The cases per year are going down and the average age of diagnosis is 69. So you are right in that most of this is legacy.
But we know now and knew then that it was dangerous.
Much like the radium girls in the early 1900's - where the people delivering the paint would wear leaded protective equipment and then management would watch (and encourage) the girls lick the paint brushes to keep the tip pointed. They knew it was bad. They just didn't give a fuck.
- hfdgiutdryg 8y agoI'd never heard of radium girls and found this interesting: https://www.cnn.com/style/article/radium-girls-radioactive-paint/index.html https://www.cnn.com/style/article/radium-girls-radioactive-p... I'm slightly confused why the public at large was ignorant of the danger of radium (and even thought it was healthy), but the radium girl managers knew the danger...?
- nemacol 8y agoIt is a compelling story. As for why the public was ignorant to the danger; radiation was only discovered in 1895 (x-rays). First injuries the following year from x-ray exposure. First death in 1904. I am no expert, so I can only speculate. Thinking that pre-internet, information moved slower and scientific information slower still. The radium they were using was "different" and really trendy. Even a handful of deaths wouldn't repel the masses. It was only 12 years after the x-ray deaths. If I can be cynical for a moment, this is a cycle that replays far too often. Some industry uses a product that is more or less known to be dangerous and it is only with years or decades of evidence, public outrage, and government intervention does that industry change its ways. Not always is it malicious or intentional, but this kind of thing does seem to happen a lot.