tl;dr the article is refuting 1970s (and earlier) era claims about how lethal plutonium is by citing anecdotes and pointing out the maximum toxicity requires a

tl;dr the article is refuting 1970s (and earlier) era claims about how lethal plutonium is by citing anecdotes and pointing out the maximum toxicity requires a totally unrealistic delivery mechanism. As an aside, I believe Plonium-210 [1] is widely viewed as more toxic than plutonium. The only thing more toxic than that is fentanyl and that's only if you're a cop [2]. Anyway, so this is just a pro-nuclear power piece. Do with that what you will. I'll just point out that with incidents like the East Palestine derailment you will often find that the companies responsible have their liability limited by law. In the case of nuclear power plant operators, their potential liability is strictly limited by the Price-Anderson Act [3]. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polonium-210 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polonium-210 [2]: https://www.grid.news/story/misinformation/2022/12/23/the-dangers-of-fentanyl-misinformation-why-the-myth-that-police-are-overdosing-by-touching-the-drug-keeps-going/ https://www.grid.news/story/misinformation/2022/12/23/the-da... [3]: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF10821#:~:text=The%20Price%2DAnderson%20Act%20authorizes,to%20members%20of%20the%20public https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF10821#:~:te....