Can Pollution Cause Genetic Mutations in Future Generations?

  • Thread starter Thread starter i_wish_i_was_smart
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dna Pollution
AI Thread Summary
A study from McMaster University in Toronto revealed that pollution can cause genetic mutations in mice, with the first group exposed to heavily polluted air experiencing mutations passed to their offspring, while the other two groups remained healthy. This raises concerns about the long-term effects of pollution on human DNA. The discussion suggests that reducing pollution by transitioning from coal and gas to safer nuclear energy could be beneficial, as modern nuclear plants are deemed significantly safer than past models like Chernobyl. There is a contrast between threat assessment, which relies on statistics, and threat perception, which is influenced by public fear and misunderstanding of risks. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the importance of addressing pollution for health and environmental safety.
i_wish_i_was_smart
Messages
91
Reaction score
1
a new study at McMasters University in Toronto has discovered that polution can alter your DNA, the research were done on mice, three categories, the first category lived in the middle of an industrial zone brething in heavily poluted air, the second lived on a farm with clean air, and the third lived in the industrial zone but breathing air filtered by a hepafilter(sp?), it was shown that after 10 week the first group had sufered a genetic mutation and that mutation was passed down to their offsprings, the next 2 groups suffered nothing, they were both healthy.

now my question is this, given that a large amount of time people breath in poluted air, mutation arises, wouldn't it be safer to cut down more on polution, take away most of the coal and gas power generators and replace them with more effecient nuclear generators, since now nuclar PPs are over 200% safer than Chernobyl, they are more effecient, and less harful to us and the enviroment, what do you guys think?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
All sounds well and good but there are always whiners who protest. Just cos of Chernobyl. However a lot of protesters don't know the facts properly, and nuclear power plants are very safe and efficient. Stupid whining greenpeace :devil:
 
i agree, there is threat assesment, which educated people use to determine their stance, those people look at all the stats never leaving one behind.
then there is threat perception, what the general public uses to make their opinion, those people use the past and the fear factor of not knowing to make their opinion, it is said that the general public can not understand a statistic over 1 in 10000, even though 1 in 1000000 means their is less threat they can't understand it there fore it is just "another" statistic
 
Life adapts

i_wish_i_was_smart said:
a new study at McMasters University in Toronto has discovered that polution can alter your DNA, the research were done on mice, three categories, the first category lived in the middle of an industrial zone brething in heavily poluted air, the second lived on a farm with clean air, and the third lived in the industrial zone but breathing air filtered by a hepafilter(sp?), it was shown that after 10 week the first group had sufered a genetic mutation and that mutation was passed down to their offsprings, the next 2 groups suffered nothing, they were both healthy.

now my question is this, given that a large amount of time people breath in poluted air, mutation arises, wouldn't it be safer to cut down more on polution, take away most of the coal and gas power generators and replace them with more effecient nuclear generators, since now nuclar PPs are over 200% safer than Chernobyl, they are more effecient, and less harful to us and the enviroment, what do you guys think?

Why are you surprised? :confused:

If a species is stressed it adapts or dies. :approve:

And how do you define healthy? :confused:
 
berty said:
Why are you surprised? :confused:

If a species is stressed it adapts or dies. :approve:

And how do you define healthy? :confused:
i never said i was surprised,
by healthy i meant no changes in those mice, not geneticaly or anything
 
Similar to the 2024 thread, here I start the 2025 thread. As always it is getting increasingly difficult to predict, so I will make a list based on other article predictions. You can also leave your prediction here. Here are the predictions of 2024 that did not make it: Peter Shor, David Deutsch and all the rest of the quantum computing community (various sources) Pablo Jarrillo Herrero, Allan McDonald and Rafi Bistritzer for magic angle in twisted graphene (various sources) Christoph...
Thread 'My experience as a hostage'
I believe it was the summer of 2001 that I made a trip to Peru for my work. I was a private contractor doing automation engineering and programming for various companies, including Frito Lay. Frito had purchased a snack food plant near Lima, Peru, and sent me down to oversee the upgrades to the systems and the startup. Peru was still suffering the ills of a recent civil war and I knew it was dicey, but the money was too good to pass up. It was a long trip to Lima; about 14 hours of airtime...
Back
Top