Thank you!Fervent Freyja said:
Thank you very much!Deneen2000 said:
Forget that study.Deneen2000 said:
In other words, zero is still possible. Given the large number of possible cancer types, possible population groups, and types of radiation you can study (and they did look at other cancer types and other types of radiation), it would be surprising if you cannot find any "significant" effect by chance. And even if it would be highly significant (it is not), it still doesn't allow separating the effect of gamma radiation and other possible causes of cancer.Study said:
Background gamma radiation refers to the constant and natural level of gamma radiation that is present in the environment from both cosmic and terrestrial sources.
Background gamma radiation is typically measured using a Geiger counter, a type of radiation detector that counts the number of gamma rays that pass through it in a given amount of time.
In small doses, background gamma radiation is not harmful to humans. However, exposure to high levels of gamma radiation can be dangerous and increase the risk of developing cancer.
The level of background gamma radiation can be affected by various factors including altitude, location, and geological composition of the area.
Background gamma radiation has a small impact on the environment as it is a natural and constant source of radiation. However, high levels of radiation can have detrimental effects on plants and animals.
