First Post, Great Site. Appreciate your ideas! We always hear that plutonium is the most toxic material on earth. The reasoning as I understand it, is that plutonium oxide has many particles which are in the 0.1 micron or so range. Particles of this size are not removed from the lungs very well when they are inhaled and thus create “Hot spots” for long periods where the radiation dose is so high that cancer formation is almost certain after a lag time of 15 to 30 years. The only way I know of producing this type of Pu oxide is by oxidizing metallic Pu. I am however not very familiar with the intermediate steps in the PUREX process, but my intuition is that in a wet chemistry process it would be unlikely or even impossible to produce this type of fluffy oxide. So, #1 Is there any reason to think that in reprocessing nuclear fuel it would be possible to produce this type of fluffy oxide? Further, once the Pu has been complexed into a ceramic with uranium, the resulting Mox would be very stable and toxicity wise very benign since ingesting it in any way would be nearly impossible. #2 Is this correct? Lastly, Health Physics Journal articles I’ve found (ref. below) indicate that the “Hot spot” hypothesis itself is nonsense. In one case, 25 WWll Los Alamos Pu workers inhaled varying amounts of fluffy Pu oxide. “Hot spot” would have predicted over 200 cancers in each worker. As of the early 1980”s none had a lung cancer. Overall mortality; lower than the general population. Health Physics (Vol. 32, pp. 359-379, 1977), Health Physics, Vol. 48, No. 3 (March 1985), pp. 249-259.] #3 Is there any reason to think that Pu is any more toxic than any of the other actinides? Thanks for helping me understand this!!