> It is very hard to measure the reduced life expectancy due to radiation. No it is not. The ability to fairly precisely calculate cancer risk over time based

> It is very hard to measure the reduced life expectancy due to radiation. No it is not. The ability to fairly precisely calculate cancer risk over time based on radiation exposure is exactly how we get the death numbers for nuclear. It's basically no different than calculating deaths from other airborne pollution except that radiation gives you cancer whereas coal soot (for example) gives you lung problems.