Ann Coulter says on Fox News: radiation is good for you

  • 130 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for kayoticdreamz
kayoticdreamz

3347

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#101 kayoticdreamz
Member since 2010 • 3347 Posts

[QUOTE="kayoticdreamz"][QUOTE="worlock77"]

Radiation is a bad thing. In the case of cancer patients it's being used to kill cells. The difference being is that it's being targeted at certain cells. This still doesn't make it a good thing, just a "lesser of two evils" kind of thing. It's like saying that cutting off limbs is a good thing because sometimes amputation is employed sometimes to prevent gangrene from spreading to a larger part of the body.

mattbbpl

and in both cases are used to save a persons life therefore in some cases radiation is a great thing. if i get cancer and the doc says you need chemo and i can afford it then well im going to dose myself with radiation to live. its not hard to figure out here pal that radiation has some great benefits. heck vaccines are just shooting you full of a disease. mold is used to make cheese....i mean lots of things that appear bad are perfectly ok in certain circumstances. like i said just another sad attempt to troll fox news.

Considering the context of the statement and situation, it would seem to me that this is a sad attempt to rationalize Fox News' position. To be perfectly honest, I find her comments to be irresponsible.

still the fact remains large doses of radiation arent neccessarly lethal. at a certain point yes but i dont think we are talking about walking straight out into a nuclear field here. radiation can be good for you via xrays and cancer patients.

chances are she is just trying to stop mass hysteria of will radiation from japan kill us all which the mainstream media has asked countless times. and no i dont think japans radiation will kill us all.

i swear people look for any chance to bash fox news they see fox news and go into instant distorting of what fox news says mode.

Avatar image for With-Hatred
With-Hatred

926

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#102 With-Hatred
Member since 2009 • 926 Posts

Well she is a *****..But without radiation your body would die.

I dont think she knew that though.

Kcube

No.....not true at all, and a very dangerous belief.

Avatar image for With-Hatred
With-Hatred

926

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#103 With-Hatred
Member since 2009 • 926 Posts

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"][QUOTE="kayoticdreamz"] and in both cases are used to save a persons life therefore in some cases radiation is a great thing. if i get cancer and the doc says you need chemo and i can afford it then well im going to dose myself with radiation to live. its not hard to figure out here pal that radiation has some great benefits. heck vaccines are just shooting you full of a disease. mold is used to make cheese....i mean lots of things that appear bad are perfectly ok in certain circumstances. like i said just another sad attempt to troll fox news.kayoticdreamz

Considering the context of the statement and situation, it would seem to me that this is a sad attempt to rationalize Fox News' position. To be perfectly honest, I find her comments to be irresponsible.

still the fact remains large doses of radiation arent neccessarly lethal. at a certain point yes but i dont think we are talking about walking straight out into a nuclear field here. radiation can be good for you via xrays and cancer patients.

chances are she is just trying to stop mass hysteria of will radiation from japan kill us all which the mainstream media has asked countless times. and no i dont think japans radiation will kill us all.

i swear people look for any chance to bash fox news they see fox news and go into instant distorting of what fox news says mode.

No, radiation isn't good for u in any case, it will always damage the body but in extreme cases can be beneficial, i.e. cancer. Now a nuclear reactor leaking radiativematerial on the other hand will kill u. The radiation levels of material with reactors are so high that it's very very deadly, we're talking cancer causing, dna destroying radiation, and undermining that is nothing short of stupid.

What they are trying to avoid is another Chernobyl where mass numbers of people have to be evacuated and land becomes deadly to live on for centuries.

Avatar image for TacticalDesire
TacticalDesire

10713

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#104 TacticalDesire
Member since 2010 • 10713 Posts

[QUOTE="TacticalDesire"]

[QUOTE="kayoticdreamz"]well she must be wrong i mean chemo therapy and cancer patients is obviously a bad thing and x rays such horrible radiation there. just another sad attempt to troll fox news.kayoticdreamz

First of all, chemo therapy isn't actually considered great for your body. There are actually multiple severe side effects that come with it, it is simply a sacrifice that one makes to kill cancerous cells. I doubt you'll find anyone who has actually been through chemo saying it is "good" for you. As for X-Rays, why do you think pregnant women aren't supposed to be exposed to them? Finally, she is essentially talking about nuclear power plant levels...not the levels given off from an X-ray.

well if those patients survive i dont think they have too much to complain about given had they not taken chemo they would died. but maybe its just me that considers living maybe a slightly more limited life(but still not a vegetable) is in fact greater than dieing.

No one said that living wasn't good, but insinuating that chemo therapy is actually good for you is ludicrous. It prevents something worse from happening. If it was good, people without cancer would be under going regular chemo therapy.

Avatar image for TacticalDesire
TacticalDesire

10713

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#105 TacticalDesire
Member since 2010 • 10713 Posts

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"][QUOTE="kayoticdreamz"] and in both cases are used to save a persons life therefore in some cases radiation is a great thing. if i get cancer and the doc says you need chemo and i can afford it then well im going to dose myself with radiation to live. its not hard to figure out here pal that radiation has some great benefits. heck vaccines are just shooting you full of a disease. mold is used to make cheese....i mean lots of things that appear bad are perfectly ok in certain circumstances. like i said just another sad attempt to troll fox news.kayoticdreamz

Considering the context of the statement and situation, it would seem to me that this is a sad attempt to rationalize Fox News' position. To be perfectly honest, I find her comments to be irresponsible.

i swear people look for any chance to bash fox news they see fox news and go into instant distorting of what fox news says mode.

What's funny is how some people do the exact opposite:P Also, even if some high levels of radiation aren't lethal, doesn't mean that they don't still cause long term health problems.

Avatar image for -Sun_Tzu-
-Sun_Tzu-

17384

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#106 -Sun_Tzu-
Member since 2007 • 17384 Posts
[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="kayoticdreamz"]well she must be wrong i mean chemo therapy and cancer patients is obviously a bad thing and x rays such horrible radiation there. just another sad attempt to troll fox news.kayoticdreamz

Radiation is a bad thing. In the case of cancer patients it's being used to kill cells. The difference being is that it's being targeted at certain cells. This still doesn't make it a good thing, just a "lesser of two evils" kind of thing. It's like saying that cutting off limbs is a good thing because sometimes amputation is employed sometimes to prevent gangrene from spreading to a larger part of the body.

and in both cases are used to save a persons life therefore in some cases radiation is a great thing. if i get cancer and the doc says you need chemo and i can afford it then well im going to dose myself with radiation to live. its not hard to figure out here pal that radiation has some great benefits. heck vaccines are just shooting you full of a disease. mold is used to make cheese....i mean lots of things that appear bad are perfectly ok in certain circumstances. like i said just another sad attempt to troll fox news.

Firstly, chemo is not radiation. Secondly, the reason why chemo and radiation are effective at treating cancer is because both chemo and radiation are bad for, and by extension are bad for cancer cells. Yes, it is an effective treatment for cancer, but by no means does that justify the assertion that it's good for you.
Avatar image for Serraph105
Serraph105

36092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#107 Serraph105
Member since 2007 • 36092 Posts

And once again I find myself siding with Bill O'rielly. I hate it when that ****ing happens. This is the same guy who (possibly) didn't understand that the tides are affected by the moon.

Anyways I too nominate Ann to be a part of the team to go fix the nuclear reactors, and when she comes out healthier than before I shall then agree with her. Until she actively takes the risk herself to prove both her point and that she believes in the crap she spews, I shall continue to call BS.

BTW it's been so long since we have heard from her instead of the crazy s*** from the tea party that her way of saying things almost sounds rational nowadays.

Avatar image for Bloodseeker23
Bloodseeker23

8338

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#108 Bloodseeker23
Member since 2008 • 8338 Posts
It's good for you if you can get Fantastic 4 powers out of it :P
Avatar image for mrbojangles25
mrbojangles25

60822

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#109 mrbojangles25
Member since 2005 • 60822 Posts

she is obviously a troll

Avatar image for Desulated
Desulated

30952

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 55

User Lists: 0

#110 Desulated
Member since 2005 • 30952 Posts

The Chernobyl victims would like a word with her.

Hah, Fox News. :lol:

Avatar image for powerman89
powerman89

2517

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#111 powerman89
Member since 2006 • 2517 Posts
Without radiation there would be no Fallout 3. Hmmm... Fox news may actually be right for once
Avatar image for Gibsonsg527
Gibsonsg527

3313

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#112 Gibsonsg527
Member since 2010 • 3313 Posts

LOL

Avatar image for Danm_999
Danm_999

13924

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#113 Danm_999
Member since 2003 • 13924 Posts
Ann Coulter said Canada sent troops to Vietnam. She's obviously not big on fact checking.
Avatar image for Espada12
Espada12

23247

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#114 Espada12
Member since 2008 • 23247 Posts

Ann Coulter said Canada sent troops to Vietnam. She's obviously not big on fact checking.Danm_999

They did though...I think you should look it up.

Avatar image for Danm_999
Danm_999

13924

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#115 Danm_999
Member since 2003 • 13924 Posts

[QUOTE="Danm_999"]Ann Coulter said Canada sent troops to Vietnam. She's obviously not big on fact checking.Espada12

They did though...I think you should look it up.

Canadians went individually through the US military, yes. But Canada sent no troops. Coulter was making the point that Canada were now ungrateful because they sent troops to Vietnam and had decided not to send troops to Iraq, which is wrong, Canada sent no troops to Vietnam. In fact, they were a harbour for draft dodgers, so they were against the war if anything.
Avatar image for Ilovegames1992
Ilovegames1992

14221

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#116 Ilovegames1992
Member since 2010 • 14221 Posts

Fox News has always been a facepalm.

Avatar image for Espada12
Espada12

23247

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#117 Espada12
Member since 2008 • 23247 Posts

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

[QUOTE="Danm_999"]Ann Coulter said Canada sent troops to Vietnam. She's obviously not big on fact checking.Danm_999

They did though...I think you should look it up.

Canadians went individually through the US military, yes. But Canada sent no troops. Coulter was making the point that Canada were now ungrateful because they sent troops to Vietnam and had decided not to send troops to Iraq, which is wrong, Canada sent no troops to Vietnam. In fact, they were a harbour for draft dodgers, so they were against the war if anything.

They sent 200 and something troops to do peace keeping in some operation. I can't remember what it was called though.

Avatar image for Danm_999
Danm_999

13924

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#118 Danm_999
Member since 2003 • 13924 Posts

[QUOTE="Danm_999"][QUOTE="Espada12"]

They did though...I think you should look it up.

Espada12

Canadians went individually through the US military, yes. But Canada sent no troops. Coulter was making the point that Canada were now ungrateful because they sent troops to Vietnam and had decided not to send troops to Iraq, which is wrong, Canada sent no troops to Vietnam. In fact, they were a harbour for draft dodgers, so they were against the war if anything.

They sent 200 and something troops to do peace keeping in some operation. I can't remember what it was called though.

There were peacekeeping Canadian soldiers sent after the Paris Peace Accords in 1973 to help enforce them (so after the US had concluded peace with North Vietnam), but there were dozens of nations involved in that, and it was after the war was over.

Avatar image for deactivated-59d151f079814
deactivated-59d151f079814

47239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#119 deactivated-59d151f079814
Member since 2003 • 47239 Posts

she is obviously a troll

mrbojangles25
... No I don't think she is, I think she believes everything she says..
Avatar image for blue_hazy_basic
blue_hazy_basic

30854

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#120 blue_hazy_basic  Moderator
Member since 2002 • 30854 Posts
As Ann Coulter is wrong about EVERYTHING, this didn't surprise me.
Avatar image for musicalmac
musicalmac

25101

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 1

#121 musicalmac  Moderator
Member since 2006 • 25101 Posts
Has anyone checked the sources? Wait, why do people care in the first place?
Avatar image for Danm_999
Danm_999

13924

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#122 Danm_999
Member since 2003 • 13924 Posts
Has anyone checked the sources? Wait, why do people care in the first place? musicalmac
The source for Ann Coulter saying these things, or her sources for claiming these things?
Avatar image for musicalmac
musicalmac

25101

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 1

#123 musicalmac  Moderator
Member since 2006 • 25101 Posts
[QUOTE="musicalmac"]Has anyone checked the sources? Wait, why do people care in the first place? Danm_999
The source for Ann Coulter saying these things, or her sources for claiming these things?

Both, I suppose. Obviously radiation is bad for you. However, I'm not a physicist, and I'd wager most the other people posting in this thread are also not physicists. It's just something that seems ridiculous on Fox News. Of course people are going to be all over it. Assumptions assumptions...
Avatar image for blue_hazy_basic
blue_hazy_basic

30854

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#124 blue_hazy_basic  Moderator
Member since 2002 • 30854 Posts
Has anyone checked the sources? Wait, why do people care in the first place? musicalmac
My guess is its the same source that says cigarettes are not cancer causing, theres no greenhouse warming and that drilling for oil is perfectly harmless to the environment. :P
Avatar image for blue_hazy_basic
blue_hazy_basic

30854

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#125 blue_hazy_basic  Moderator
Member since 2002 • 30854 Posts
[QUOTE="Danm_999"][QUOTE="musicalmac"]Has anyone checked the sources? Wait, why do people care in the first place? musicalmac
The source for Ann Coulter saying these things, or her sources for claiming these things?

Both, I suppose. Obviously radiation is bad for you. However, I'm not a physicist, and I'd wager most the other people posting in this thread are also not physicists. It's just something that seems ridiculous on Fox News. Of course people are going to be all over it. Assumptions assumptions...

Well I watched here say it on Fox News last week on Billo's show and even he was ridiculing it, so ....
Avatar image for musicalmac
musicalmac

25101

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 1

#126 musicalmac  Moderator
Member since 2006 • 25101 Posts
Well I watched here say it on Fox News last week on Billo's show and even he was ridiculing it, so ....blue_hazy_basic
All the more reason to check the sources for most here in this thread, right? ;) And hazy, you and I agree on many things..
...theres no greenhouse warming...blue_hazy_basic
I'm afraid on this, we do not. Global cooling was all the rage in the 70s. Who knows what it'll be in another couple decades. While I praise proper treatment of our Earth, recycling, and reusing, I don't think the situation is as dire as some would have you believe. Otherwise, Al would still be making movies.
Avatar image for Danm_999
Danm_999

13924

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#127 Danm_999
Member since 2003 • 13924 Posts
[QUOTE="Danm_999"][QUOTE="musicalmac"]Has anyone checked the sources? Wait, why do people care in the first place? musicalmac
The source for Ann Coulter saying these things, or her sources for claiming these things?

Both, I suppose. Obviously radiation is bad for you. However, I'm not a physicist, and I'd wager most the other people posting in this thread are also not physicists. It's just something that seems ridiculous on Fox News. Of course people are going to be all over it. Assumptions assumptions...

Well, she does say it in quite frank terms; radiation in amounts above government regulated maximums is likely beneficial. To be honest, it's a dumb thing for her to say given what's going on in Japan right now.
Avatar image for musicalmac
musicalmac

25101

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 1

#128 musicalmac  Moderator
Member since 2006 • 25101 Posts
[QUOTE="Danm_999"] Well, she does say it in quite frank terms; radiation in amounts above government regulated maximums is likely beneficial. To be honest, it's a dumb thing for her to say given what's going on in Japan right now.

Don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not defending her. I just don't know enough either way to make a judgement call. She doesn't even specify what she means by "above government regulated maximums" means. Sounds to me like this is more of an entertainment bit than a real news article. Which begs the question--why aren't people smart enough to realize it's not news and consequently choose not to make it news? Or are there other motives... ;)
Avatar image for Danm_999
Danm_999

13924

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#129 Danm_999
Member since 2003 • 13924 Posts
[QUOTE="musicalmac"] Don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not defending her. I just don't know enough either way to make a judgement call. She doesn't even specify what she means by "above government regulated maximums" means. Sounds to me like this is more of an entertainment bit than a real news article. Which begs the question--why aren't people smart enough to realize it's not news and consequently choose not to make it news? Or are there other motives... ;)

Well, I'd agree it's really not that important in the scheme of things, the reason it's been so publicised is probably because its that carthatic piece of stupidity someone somewhere in the media releases during a crisis. I mean, whether or not raditation in above recommended doseages can avoid cancer long term, when Japan is scrambling to save thousands of its people from radiation sickness, you should probably keep schtum about how you think there might be a benefit.
Avatar image for musicalmac
musicalmac

25101

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 1

#130 musicalmac  Moderator
Member since 2006 • 25101 Posts
[QUOTE="Danm_999"] Well, I'd agree it's really not that important in the scheme of things, the reason it's been so publicised is probably because its that carthatic piece of stupidity someone somewhere in the media releases during a crisis. I mean, whether or not raditation in above recommended doseages can avoid cancer long term, when Japan is scrambling to save thousands of its people from radiation sickness, you should probably keep schtum about how you think there might be a benefit.

Ann said it in bad taste, totally agree on that point. Makes her seem pretty heartless.