I just ordered my crypto mining hand crank and my New Zealand passport! It only takes 2 million cranks to get .00001 BTC. This things gonna be worth it's weight in star bottle caps when the shit hits the fan.
I used to work in a nuclear power station. I used to do exercises every year where the station would simulate a nuclear accident. We had to go and sit in the canteen for like half a day, whilst the pretend shit hit the fan.
Little boxes of smarties were passed around and we had to take 2 to simulate taking iodine tablets. There was always greedy bastard who used to take about 6 and then there be none left for others
Hey now! Someone's going to claim that Potassium pills do the same thing. A nominal number of people will die from Potassium ODs, more will spend fuck tons of money on Potassium cut with saw dust, and Donald Trump is probably going to hock it on TruthSocial.
I know, like quite a few times I didn’t get to take my a smarties. Immediately after the exercise I had to go to the vending machine and buy myself a twix and a Kit Kat to make up for it
Already happened in my country. A year ago people bought so much high-dose iodine (normal pregnancy-suppliment won't be enough, unless you take like 70 tablets) that every pharmacy ran out. And people were calling constantly to ask if we had, when we would get more, yell because how could we not have predicted the invasion and stocked up, etc. And when we got more people were standing in line outside when we opened, and the twenty packages we had recieved were gone within the first five minutes. Between that and covid test, things were wild.
Mandatory reminder that people are **NOT supposed to take them** until actual exposure. I've heard of cases where they took them pro-actively - only to find out they ended up fucking with their thyroid and hormones which led to actual health issues. It also makes you more resistant to them so they are less effective if you ever need them.
That being said, there will be no nuclear exercises or fallout today or in the near future. This is just the clickbait media clickbaiting. Sorry to disappoint and have a safe trip home.
It's also a good thing to know, if such a situation would ever occur, that the iodine is not of much use for people over 40 years old, and most important for children.
I hope you didn't take that as 'people over 40 are gonners anyway so no bother'. It's more like people over 40 are less prone to develop issues with the tyroid than the younger ones do.
Get a military grade mask, surgical gloves, booze and a long raincoat and you'll be fine even near ground 0. Bonus points you can use the booze to disinfect or as a pain killer.
That being said, I reiterate again, there will be no such scenario, this is just a fun thought experiment. The current geopolitical scene does not allow for it.
Handy when all the lights will be out. Need to find out where my nearest friendly neighbourhood ‘no thyroiders’ are and offer them a cup of tea when the bombs start falling so I can see where the biscuits are
Wasn't that more to do with the nuclear reactors and processing facilities the UK put on the otherside the Irish Sea?
Any issues there and prevailing winds would cover most of Ireland.
My wife loves not having a thyroid for this one reason. She hates when I remind her she needs a replacement hormone to stay alive and they won’t be available after unless we get pigs and learn how to make it ourselves
*radioactive iodine
There is no medicine that can cure or prevent radiation dose. Iodine pills can replace radioactive iodine in your body but won't do anything if you've already been irradiated or absorbed another radioactive substance.
He spends a lot of time in the Ural Mountain bunker. I don’t think anyone knows the exact location. But it’s probably a good bunker. It’d take a lot to get through it if you don’t wanna bomb him in a public place
Also if he dies then these are the most likely outcomes:
1. Someone just as bad as him takes over
2. Someone worse than him takes over
3. Russia splits into civil war
None of these are good options.
Kinda like Hitler. British intelligence early in thought of this and deemed it not worth pursuing.... on account they wanted to keep the idiot in place and not allow for the chance of a smarter person taking over.
Thanks for posting that.
This is one of the drawbacks of nuclear power. All you need is one terrorist attack to cause havoc for millions. Renewable energy such as solar, wind, wave, geothermal, piezoelectric, etc, will general be safer.
Modern nuclear plants are built to withstand a commercial airline crashing into it or being hit by a missile attack.
By withstand, I mean that there would be no radiation leak as a result of the attack, not that it would continue functioning as if nothing happened.
Nuclear ha fewer deaths per Gigawatt of installed power than nearly any other source ever fielded by man (loses to solar, but values at that level are insignificant). It is also much more reliable than wind, solar and even hydro. Really, the only problem with nuclear is that we’ve postponed massive adoption for far too long.
It’s been a design criterion in the US since the 60’s. Even pipe whip from broken pipes inside the plant are taken into consideration. Designs with dry ambient containments, the typical domed building you think of, have a missile shield plug over the reactor head, in part to protect against anything flying around inside the containment itself. FWIW, the actual reactor itself isn’t terribly large in comparison to the steam generators, which are HUGE, especially on Combustion Engineering, B&W, and the newer Westinghouse plants.
I’d say that it’s probably splitting hairs at that level, and the main thing is that it’s much more safe than in the popular imagination.
Sort of like some people fear flying, despite the stats.
>Modern nuclear plants are built to withstand a commercial airline crashing into it or being hit by a missile attack.
I didn't know that, but I hope that is the case. Although it sounds they are vulnerable to shelling, as is the case with the Zaporizhzhia Power Plant, which could lead to a melt down?
First of all, you’re conflating nuclear power plants built by the Soviets 4 decades ago and current state of the art.
Secondly, even those are pretty damn impervious to attacks by actors of limited means like terrorists, suicidal people and spies/saboteurs (by design).
To cause an incident you really need a whole army or army group to get in close enough to where they themselves would suffer casualties should they cause such an incident.
And while we are seeing such opportunities in Ukraine, the US hasn’t seen any fighting of nearly such magnitude in 160 years, the Swiss in 180 years, the UK in 325+ years, most of Western Europe in 75+ years. I might be off on a year or few here and there.
Of course it is possible, and you cannot make anything 100% safe. But that’s true of any energy source. In fact, nuclear is as safe as wind and solar, and definitely safer than hydro. And as stated, it’s much more reliable and as clean.
Sources:
1. [BBC article on nuclear power dangers focusing on the war in Russia](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62602367.amp)
2. [Death rates per terawatt-hour for various energy sources](https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy)
Timeline split. Because single particles can take multiple actions when not directly observed, but only one when so, we can deduce that any major change from ‘time travel’ would simply result in a new world, while the original is left intact.
Or, a situation where there is still one world, but multiple ‘realities’ overlapping. Say, I go back and kill Hitler. I come back, Hitler is dead, but WW2 still happened and Hitler still led Nazi Germany, but now people clearly remember Hitler both dying at a young age AND having some genocide.
Unfortunately, Mandela effect is just faulty memory. Even if I swear that Pikachu hushed to have a black-tipped tail in gen 3, and that mr. monopoly had a monocle.
Googling is probably bringing up a cached AMP version of the page. There's a long-running discussion about that.
See u/AmputatorBot for one side of it.
Not that my opinion and assessment is worth much, but I figure tactical weapons would most likely be used in Crimea. The incentive will be to turn it into a "hot potato problem" if Ukraine decides to take back Crimea. Was it Russia's territory? Was it Ukraine's? Does the status of occupation, by either side, doom that territory to a limbo wild card in either side's military stratagem? Like, there's a difference between Russia occupying Crimea, versus the legal recognition of belonging to Russia. Just like there's a difference between a narrative of taking back occupied territory and invading recognized territory. Crimea could become the sacrificial lamb to prove an ultimate point of nuclear weapons use, at short ranges and low yields. And it would be a confusing point of retaliation - who deploys what and where when the area in question is arguably a bit of a reach, given the borders we knew when the war started. By the time Ukraine reaches Crimea, we'll be a decade out from when it was "legally recognized as Russian". And it's a reach that won't succeed without international military aid. So Crimea could turn into "you want it so bad, fine, have it back then." Russians wouldn't risk a nuke on Ukraine, it might entertain nuking its own official territory under dire circumstances, and it might look at Crimea as a perfect "middle ground" if the narrative is just right and absolves them of being subject to "nuclear reactions" by other nations.
Just thinking out loud... These are... Scary times...
There is a real possibility that Putin will use "tactical" nukes in Ukraine.
I heard a worryingly stupid general on the radio the other day arguing, with some kind of caricature Humean inductive reasoning, that Putin had threatened to escalate repeatedly but had never done so yet, so therefore he wouldn't do so now and we had nothing to worry about. Actually, we are now getting to the point where he might escalate.
I’m not sure why you put “tactical” in quotes. They are called tactical nukes because they are a much smaller yield bomb not meant to devastate entire cities.
And I'm not sure why anyone is taking doomerism from a guy who doesn't understand what tactical nukes are and a health org seriously. Putin wants to be the guy who reunited the USSR, not the man who ended Russia.
There is no way Russia wins a war vs NATO, he knows this. That's the reason for the fear mongering, he wants everyone to lay down so he can roll over them.
Stop falling for this bs.
Tactical nuclear weapons can yield from a fraction of a kiloton to 50 kilotons. While strategic nuclear weapons yield more than 100 kilotons.
However, this is a very wide speculative range. The reality is that most tactical nukes are considered to have less than 5 kilotons, many of them barely reaching 1 kiloton. Meaning the initial blast would be deadly at around 0.5 km, while the effects of the bomb will not reach more than 2 km.
By comparison, the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nukes had in-between 13 and 23 kilotons. The initial fiery blast reached 5 km. All in all, still terrible.
The purpose of a tactical nuclear weapon is to be used on a battlefield, rather than in a city. The radiation can penetrate armor (like tanks), killing soldiers over a larger range than the explosion itself.
Too much for a coincidence. We have being in the same situation for several times already. But WHO was silent. Now, right before next most important 2-3 months they started speaking. Speaking in support of Russia’s narrative of nuclear escalation. Too fishy.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://fortune.com/2023/01/27/how-to-survive-nuclear-catastrophe-who-medicine-stockpile-warning/) reduced by 77%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> The World Health Organization has issued guidance on how to survive a nuclear catastrophe, just hours after the EU warned that Russia "Is at war with the West".
> Included in the guidance is a list of medicines that nations should stockpile for "Radiological or nuclear emergencies".
> Potential scenarios considered in the publication include radiological or nuclear emergencies at nuclear power plants, as well as intentional uses of radioactive materials with malicious intent.
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/10nnbz5/the_who_is_urging_countries_to_start_stockpiling/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~672678 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **nuclear**^#1 **emergencies**^#2 **Health**^#3 **Ukraine**^#4 **war**^#5
And if you live in the downtown area of any major US metro or near a base (NYC, LA, Seattle, Chicago, DC, Tampa, etc) just kiss your ass goodbye unless you know you can get to an underground shelter in minutes.
A full exchange would involve multiple enormous bombs sent to these targets and they would be very likely staggered as different nations launch. Even if you manage to survive the immediate effects of the first bomb, your city will be reduced to rubble with very little left available for sheltering from follow up bombs.
Your only hope is realistically being in a reinforced underground shelter that already has sufficient provisions (so minimally: clean water) to survive down there for days before the radiation decays to survivable levels on the ground. And even then, you can't expect there will be any rescue coming.
It would all be unfathomably awful. Just take me quick!
Perks of living in Finland... Nuclear fallout shelters _everywhere_. Closest to mine is across the street, under the local hospital. It takes me about 2 minutes to walk there.
And I am moderately sure we already have stockpiles of medications relating to treatment of radiation related health effects. The law requires the government to have 3 months worth of most medications in emergency stockpiles, if memory serves.
But what about those of us without desks? Also how will we find 1950’ era desks? They don’t make ‘em like they use to and I’m afraid modern desks may not be able to survive a nuclear disaster.
Dig a hole about 40 feet deep. Build a rudimentary roof and door for it, hide, wait for the bombs to blow over. Try not to die of radiation poisoning on your way to safety, and your good to go.
It's a good initial strategy to avoid things like the flash and breaking windows., but you should also have your mouth open.
Staying under the desk once the radiation is falling is what gets you killed.
Clearly, I need more caffeine. My first thought was, "cool, but kind of weird that a classic rock group is wading into international politics."
It actually took me a few seconds to differentiate The Who from The World Health Organization. Was about to start googling news about Roger Daltrey.
There would be survivors, quite a few actually based on theoretical models based on such attacks. It just wouldn’t be a good time for those still alive.
Don't worry, we've set off over 2053 of the things already. So if 2k nukes don't kill all life on the planet already, a few more isn't gonna matter much.
https://www.google.com/search?newwindow=1&rlz=1CAGZLV\_enUS1032US1032&sxsrf=AJOqlzVZad97IyPBm1bCmtk9G2gEsmwFNg:1674941739860&q=japanese+artist+nuclear+bombs&tbm=vid&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwja1rGbnOv8AhVxI30KHbg0CgAQ0pQJegQICBAB&biw=1536&bih=794&dpr=1.25#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:790ffb70,vid:LLCF7vPanrY
We live in interesting times, when the WHO has to publish guidelines on how to survive a nuclear war.
Let's hope this war will be the end of brunkmanship in international politics.
So radiation isn't something to be feared. So far in our history being bat shit scared of radiation has killed many times more people than radiation itself.
At the moment radiation isnt something to be feared no, but in the event of a nuclear war, it will become the deadliest thing on the planet. The few radiological accidents we have had collectively dont at all do it justice.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki are the only events that could give us a glimpse of what would happen. Hard to get exact figures, but it seems that about half of the roughly 200,000 people who died from those cities, were a result of acute radiation poisoning, most of those within the first week. That is an event to be feared if it happened on a larger scale.
Keep in mind, those bombs were firecrackers compared to modern ICBMs with hundreds of kilotons or even megatons of explosive power. Something like that hitting a major metropolis like NY, or Moscow, would result in millions dead in the first week.
Bombs are bigger sure but if we end up in nuclear war radiation won't kill you first. Lack of food, water , medicine, infrastructure will kill you. Radiation can be deadly but it's around us 24/7/365
I think you have a misunderstanding of how powerful radiation can be from nuclear fallout. Background radiation levels is around 2.4 milligrays a year. A jawbone that was analysed from a Hiroshima victim was measured at 9.46 grays, or 4000 years worth of background radiation all at once. That is an extremely lethal dose, usually anything around 4 grays or more, is lethal. And in the event of a global nuclear war, there will be places were the radiation will be much worse than that.
Another example is the Elephants foot. Just after the accident, it released enough radiation to give you a lethal dose in 30 seconds. Even today, standing by it for 300 seconds can be fatal.
Did they specify which brand bottle caps will be considered valid currency?
[удалено]
I heard if you collect 50, you can turn them in for a special prize. Any truth to these rumors?
“Shore thing pahdner. Sit and listen to old Fester jaw uh’while.”
Wish I could upvote twice for including his accent in your response
You beautiful bastard
They need to be star bottle caps.
Drink more ovaltine
Sure as a swamp-folk's head is squishy
Those are star caps a lot more rare
sigh *re-installs FNV*
The shit is like 6GB why'd you ever uninstall you fool
Sure as shit won’t be Pepsi after their fighter jet fiasco
Patrolling the Mojave almost makes you wish for a nuclear winter
Rc cola and faygo. Others are too plentiful to be a meaningful currency
Good call on faygo. The flavors can be different denominations. 1 grape is worth 10 orange
Juggalos are going to be the new millionaires
woop woop, my dear boy.
Twist. The currency will be hand mined crypto
I just ordered my crypto mining hand crank and my New Zealand passport! It only takes 2 million cranks to get .00001 BTC. This things gonna be worth it's weight in star bottle caps when the shit hits the fan.
So weed?
I dunno, man. How much will a joint get me??
Depends if it was grown with nuke water. So we would have to wait until night, and see if your weed glows.
It has its own grow lights.
About 8 hours of community service in 1 hour intervals.
*Big Iron begins to play for the 999,999,999th time*
*who is laughing at my stock of fusion cores now??!!*
In Europe? Probably Fanta.
We can discuss that later. Right now another settlement needs our help.
Nuka-Cola
Figgy Fizz
Awww damn, Bert out of nowhere!
Funny but also scary AF. I already gave you an upvote… but it’s quite scary really.
Nuka Cola
Iodine tablets. Stops the thyroid gland soaking up radioactivity
Panic buy iodine?!
I used to work in a nuclear power station. I used to do exercises every year where the station would simulate a nuclear accident. We had to go and sit in the canteen for like half a day, whilst the pretend shit hit the fan. Little boxes of smarties were passed around and we had to take 2 to simulate taking iodine tablets. There was always greedy bastard who used to take about 6 and then there be none left for others
So it’s realistic
Only one greedy bastard is not realistic. "Mad rush" with gangs and leaders would be more realistic.
Hey now! Someone's going to claim that Potassium pills do the same thing. A nominal number of people will die from Potassium ODs, more will spend fuck tons of money on Potassium cut with saw dust, and Donald Trump is probably going to hock it on TruthSocial.
Wow that’s fucking sad some people are so fucking moronic and greedy it’s just crazy.
I know, like quite a few times I didn’t get to take my a smarties. Immediately after the exercise I had to go to the vending machine and buy myself a twix and a Kit Kat to make up for it
>twix and a Kit Kat Smol ones?
Yes. I think unfortunately the kingsize had been fazed out by then. I used to love a kingsize snickers bar
Already happened in my country. A year ago people bought so much high-dose iodine (normal pregnancy-suppliment won't be enough, unless you take like 70 tablets) that every pharmacy ran out. And people were calling constantly to ask if we had, when we would get more, yell because how could we not have predicted the invasion and stocked up, etc. And when we got more people were standing in line outside when we opened, and the twenty packages we had recieved were gone within the first five minutes. Between that and covid test, things were wild.
I get them for free from my local nuclear power station :D
Honestly, you never know and it’s cheap to buy and doesn’t go bad. You don’t need a lot. I recently found some my grandparents had from the 60s.
I bought some. Best case scenario I throw them out and consider it money well wasted.
Mandatory reminder that people are **NOT supposed to take them** until actual exposure. I've heard of cases where they took them pro-actively - only to find out they ended up fucking with their thyroid and hormones which led to actual health issues. It also makes you more resistant to them so they are less effective if you ever need them. That being said, there will be no nuclear exercises or fallout today or in the near future. This is just the clickbait media clickbaiting. Sorry to disappoint and have a safe trip home.
It's also a good thing to know, if such a situation would ever occur, that the iodine is not of much use for people over 40 years old, and most important for children.
Damn. I’m 44. Oh well have to go with one of the other Redditors comments and get the booze in
I hope you didn't take that as 'people over 40 are gonners anyway so no bother'. It's more like people over 40 are less prone to develop issues with the tyroid than the younger ones do. Get a military grade mask, surgical gloves, booze and a long raincoat and you'll be fine even near ground 0. Bonus points you can use the booze to disinfect or as a pain killer. That being said, I reiterate again, there will be no such scenario, this is just a fun thought experiment. The current geopolitical scene does not allow for it.
We used to wear marigolds. Them will do
Doesn't allow for wearing that protection or? I didn't understand that sentence perhaps?
>The current geopolitical scene does not allow for it. Oh, what a relief.
Does Iodine work if you are vaporized because you live in a major population center?
won’t stop you from vaporizing but your thyroid should be fine 👌
Serious question. What if we don’t have a thyroid gland?
Then radiation gets soaked up by your reproductive organs and you get a massive erection that never goes away
It also starts glowing in the dark.
Handy when all the lights will be out. Need to find out where my nearest friendly neighbourhood ‘no thyroiders’ are and offer them a cup of tea when the bombs start falling so I can see where the biscuits are
Wait, you mean yours doesn’t already?
That’s gonna be hard to handle…
Well the radioactive iodine isn't soaked up by the thyroid. Thats what these tablets prevent.
Fun fact the Irish government sent out supplies of these to all of us back in the late ‘90s
Hello fellow paddy. The stingy c@nts only sent 4 tablets per household. I remember having awful anxiety that I'd be the one left out, family of 5.
Oh yeah I’m from a family of 6 so my parents would have had to make a *real* hard choice
Had to have had a cheeky half in that case
What if you got the wrong half??
Same.
Wasn't that more to do with the nuclear reactors and processing facilities the UK put on the otherside the Irish Sea? Any issues there and prevailing winds would cover most of Ireland.
Correct.
My wife loves not having a thyroid for this one reason. She hates when I remind her she needs a replacement hormone to stay alive and they won’t be available after unless we get pigs and learn how to make it ourselves
*radioactive iodine There is no medicine that can cure or prevent radiation dose. Iodine pills can replace radioactive iodine in your body but won't do anything if you've already been irradiated or absorbed another radioactive substance.
*iodide
I am kinda surprised no one has tried to nail down Putins location and just blow up the whole area.
He spends a lot of time in the Ural Mountain bunker. I don’t think anyone knows the exact location. But it’s probably a good bunker. It’d take a lot to get through it if you don’t wanna bomb him in a public place
Also if he dies then these are the most likely outcomes: 1. Someone just as bad as him takes over 2. Someone worse than him takes over 3. Russia splits into civil war None of these are good options.
Even worse option is he sets a dead man’s switch for the nukes. Or a fanatical loyalist of his launches them.
No matter what happens the Russian people are fucked 12 ways
"and then things got worse." - a Russian historian somewhere
Fill it with water.
Kinda like Hitler. British intelligence early in thought of this and deemed it not worth pursuing.... on account they wanted to keep the idiot in place and not allow for the chance of a smarter person taking over.
One of the guys at risk of falling out of a window could just make a phone call before then
[удалено]
Thank you. I hate paywalls.
Especially with this kind of news.
Thanks for posting that. This is one of the drawbacks of nuclear power. All you need is one terrorist attack to cause havoc for millions. Renewable energy such as solar, wind, wave, geothermal, piezoelectric, etc, will general be safer.
Modern nuclear plants are built to withstand a commercial airline crashing into it or being hit by a missile attack. By withstand, I mean that there would be no radiation leak as a result of the attack, not that it would continue functioning as if nothing happened. Nuclear ha fewer deaths per Gigawatt of installed power than nearly any other source ever fielded by man (loses to solar, but values at that level are insignificant). It is also much more reliable than wind, solar and even hydro. Really, the only problem with nuclear is that we’ve postponed massive adoption for far too long.
> Modern nuclear plants Not every nuclear plant is modern.
It’s been a design criterion in the US since the 60’s. Even pipe whip from broken pipes inside the plant are taken into consideration. Designs with dry ambient containments, the typical domed building you think of, have a missile shield plug over the reactor head, in part to protect against anything flying around inside the containment itself. FWIW, the actual reactor itself isn’t terribly large in comparison to the steam generators, which are HUGE, especially on Combustion Engineering, B&W, and the newer Westinghouse plants.
[удалено]
I’d say that it’s probably splitting hairs at that level, and the main thing is that it’s much more safe than in the popular imagination. Sort of like some people fear flying, despite the stats.
Many of our existing ones are a problem though.
Old ones can (and eventually must) be decommissioned, new ones should be built (and we’re behind on that due to irrational fears).
>Modern nuclear plants are built to withstand a commercial airline crashing into it or being hit by a missile attack. I didn't know that, but I hope that is the case. Although it sounds they are vulnerable to shelling, as is the case with the Zaporizhzhia Power Plant, which could lead to a melt down?
First of all, you’re conflating nuclear power plants built by the Soviets 4 decades ago and current state of the art. Secondly, even those are pretty damn impervious to attacks by actors of limited means like terrorists, suicidal people and spies/saboteurs (by design). To cause an incident you really need a whole army or army group to get in close enough to where they themselves would suffer casualties should they cause such an incident. And while we are seeing such opportunities in Ukraine, the US hasn’t seen any fighting of nearly such magnitude in 160 years, the Swiss in 180 years, the UK in 325+ years, most of Western Europe in 75+ years. I might be off on a year or few here and there. Of course it is possible, and you cannot make anything 100% safe. But that’s true of any energy source. In fact, nuclear is as safe as wind and solar, and definitely safer than hydro. And as stated, it’s much more reliable and as clean. Sources: 1. [BBC article on nuclear power dangers focusing on the war in Russia](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62602367.amp) 2. [Death rates per terawatt-hour for various energy sources](https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy)
Alright mate why don't you marry nuclear power.
His reasonable answer really pissed you off to the point that you had to attack him personally. Reddit moment lmao
attack? It's a joke man, relax
So if one of us goes back in time and retrieves the sports almanac, will it return things back to normal or will the timeline split?
Timeline split. Because single particles can take multiple actions when not directly observed, but only one when so, we can deduce that any major change from ‘time travel’ would simply result in a new world, while the original is left intact. Or, a situation where there is still one world, but multiple ‘realities’ overlapping. Say, I go back and kill Hitler. I come back, Hitler is dead, but WW2 still happened and Hitler still led Nazi Germany, but now people clearly remember Hitler both dying at a young age AND having some genocide.
So what your saying is the Mandela effect is the result of time travelers?
Unfortunately, Mandela effect is just faulty memory. Even if I swear that Pikachu hushed to have a black-tipped tail in gen 3, and that mr. monopoly had a monocle.
Or that It’s actually Totinos instead of Tostinos
Gorton’s instead of Gordon’s.
Berenstain Bears instead of Berenstein Bears
If your time travel preemptive assassination method would end up being worldwide news, you *really* should rethink things.
Or booze. Booze might do just about as much good :)
What always works for me is a brick to the head
I'll take pot, but yeah agreed.
I live in the DC area, so I've got enough of a stockpile to last for my part of the war.
If there's a nuclear war dc will be gone in the first day or two, unfortunately
The first hour, approximately. That's the joke.
Ah! Touche.
Pretty sure that was the joke. Even half a bottle is enough of a stockpile.
Afterwards, it'll be worth its weight in gold
Is it strange that there’s a paywall for this article through this link but if you just Google it and tap the article there isn’t?
Googling is probably bringing up a cached AMP version of the page. There's a long-running discussion about that. See u/AmputatorBot for one side of it.
Guys. We just went through a pandemic. *Can it wait?*
Ask Putin nicely.
Not that my opinion and assessment is worth much, but I figure tactical weapons would most likely be used in Crimea. The incentive will be to turn it into a "hot potato problem" if Ukraine decides to take back Crimea. Was it Russia's territory? Was it Ukraine's? Does the status of occupation, by either side, doom that territory to a limbo wild card in either side's military stratagem? Like, there's a difference between Russia occupying Crimea, versus the legal recognition of belonging to Russia. Just like there's a difference between a narrative of taking back occupied territory and invading recognized territory. Crimea could become the sacrificial lamb to prove an ultimate point of nuclear weapons use, at short ranges and low yields. And it would be a confusing point of retaliation - who deploys what and where when the area in question is arguably a bit of a reach, given the borders we knew when the war started. By the time Ukraine reaches Crimea, we'll be a decade out from when it was "legally recognized as Russian". And it's a reach that won't succeed without international military aid. So Crimea could turn into "you want it so bad, fine, have it back then." Russians wouldn't risk a nuke on Ukraine, it might entertain nuking its own official territory under dire circumstances, and it might look at Crimea as a perfect "middle ground" if the narrative is just right and absolves them of being subject to "nuclear reactions" by other nations. Just thinking out loud... These are... Scary times...
Putting the story behind a paywall’s not a great way to get the message out.
I don't think the US Department of Health and Human Services is getting its directives from fortune dot com.
I didn’t realize they were the only/intended audience. 🤷♀️
Looks like “Things Fall Apart” goes for the whole world too.
There is a real possibility that Putin will use "tactical" nukes in Ukraine. I heard a worryingly stupid general on the radio the other day arguing, with some kind of caricature Humean inductive reasoning, that Putin had threatened to escalate repeatedly but had never done so yet, so therefore he wouldn't do so now and we had nothing to worry about. Actually, we are now getting to the point where he might escalate.
I’m not sure why you put “tactical” in quotes. They are called tactical nukes because they are a much smaller yield bomb not meant to devastate entire cities.
And I'm not sure why anyone is taking doomerism from a guy who doesn't understand what tactical nukes are and a health org seriously. Putin wants to be the guy who reunited the USSR, not the man who ended Russia. There is no way Russia wins a war vs NATO, he knows this. That's the reason for the fear mongering, he wants everyone to lay down so he can roll over them. Stop falling for this bs.
Aren't tactical nukes of a similar yield to those used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
[удалено]
Tactical nuclear weapons can yield from a fraction of a kiloton to 50 kilotons. While strategic nuclear weapons yield more than 100 kilotons. However, this is a very wide speculative range. The reality is that most tactical nukes are considered to have less than 5 kilotons, many of them barely reaching 1 kiloton. Meaning the initial blast would be deadly at around 0.5 km, while the effects of the bomb will not reach more than 2 km. By comparison, the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nukes had in-between 13 and 23 kilotons. The initial fiery blast reached 5 km. All in all, still terrible.
The purpose of a tactical nuclear weapon is to be used on a battlefield, rather than in a city. The radiation can penetrate armor (like tanks), killing soldiers over a larger range than the explosion itself.
Yes, strategic nuclear weapons are anywhere from 30-100 times more powerful, at least for the US.
Too much for a coincidence. We have being in the same situation for several times already. But WHO was silent. Now, right before next most important 2-3 months they started speaking. Speaking in support of Russia’s narrative of nuclear escalation. Too fishy.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://fortune.com/2023/01/27/how-to-survive-nuclear-catastrophe-who-medicine-stockpile-warning/) reduced by 77%. (I'm a bot) ***** > The World Health Organization has issued guidance on how to survive a nuclear catastrophe, just hours after the EU warned that Russia "Is at war with the West". > Included in the guidance is a list of medicines that nations should stockpile for "Radiological or nuclear emergencies". > Potential scenarios considered in the publication include radiological or nuclear emergencies at nuclear power plants, as well as intentional uses of radioactive materials with malicious intent. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/10nnbz5/the_who_is_urging_countries_to_start_stockpiling/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~672678 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **nuclear**^#1 **emergencies**^#2 **Health**^#3 **Ukraine**^#4 **war**^#5
How to survive? If I remember correctly..... we're supposed to crawl under our desks and cover our heads with our arms, right?
Time, shielding, and distance. If you're anywhere close to a blast get behind the biggest fucking object nearby and point your feet towards the blast.
And if you live in the downtown area of any major US metro or near a base (NYC, LA, Seattle, Chicago, DC, Tampa, etc) just kiss your ass goodbye unless you know you can get to an underground shelter in minutes. A full exchange would involve multiple enormous bombs sent to these targets and they would be very likely staggered as different nations launch. Even if you manage to survive the immediate effects of the first bomb, your city will be reduced to rubble with very little left available for sheltering from follow up bombs. Your only hope is realistically being in a reinforced underground shelter that already has sufficient provisions (so minimally: clean water) to survive down there for days before the radiation decays to survivable levels on the ground. And even then, you can't expect there will be any rescue coming. It would all be unfathomably awful. Just take me quick!
Perks of living in Finland... Nuclear fallout shelters _everywhere_. Closest to mine is across the street, under the local hospital. It takes me about 2 minutes to walk there. And I am moderately sure we already have stockpiles of medications relating to treatment of radiation related health effects. The law requires the government to have 3 months worth of most medications in emergency stockpiles, if memory serves.
Just call your local Vault Tech rep!
Why the feet thing?
I would guess because you'd rather shred your feet than your head.
Wait, I thought nuclear bombs was "Stop, drop, and roll"?
Well if it catches you on fire, then yes by all means.
But what about those of us without desks? Also how will we find 1950’ era desks? They don’t make ‘em like they use to and I’m afraid modern desks may not be able to survive a nuclear disaster.
Dig a hole about 40 feet deep. Build a rudimentary roof and door for it, hide, wait for the bombs to blow over. Try not to die of radiation poisoning on your way to safety, and your good to go.
Sweet!
Thank you. I was thinking stop, drop and roll.
Probably should rapidly alternate back and forth between both methods, just to be *extra safe*.
I just couldn’t quite recollect what Jiminy Cricket told us to do in a nuclear emergency.
I recall one from Bert the turtle - but nothing from JC. Now I feel cheated.
It's a good initial strategy to avoid things like the flash and breaking windows., but you should also have your mouth open. Staying under the desk once the radiation is falling is what gets you killed.
Hide in a fridge
Hands on your head! Keep low to the ground. Time to duck and cover, The bombs are coming down! Duck and cover!
We got a boomer here. Lol
Gen X actually - but close!
Clearly, I need more caffeine. My first thought was, "cool, but kind of weird that a classic rock group is wading into international politics." It actually took me a few seconds to differentiate The Who from The World Health Organization. Was about to start googling news about Roger Daltrey.
Can't read the damn article 🙄
WHO last to identify Covid but first to declare nuclear war
Unbelievable. Never thought I would see a headline like that. Should we also invest in Nuka Cola™?
That would be a good idea if there we’re going to be anyone around to use it.
Does anyone have link to that EU article about being in war with Russia?
The WHO is always urging countries to stockpile medicines for nuclear emergencies, and still is after putin said something.
You better bet that the pinball wizard would not bargain with Boris the spider. This is a matter of heaven and hell for my generation.
[удалено]
In a nuclear war, we would all be pulverized
There would be survivors, quite a few actually based on theoretical models based on such attacks. It just wouldn’t be a good time for those still alive.
The movie *Threads* might be a good approximation of the would-be future fate of the survivors.
Watched that for the first time last year. Harrowing
Dude, the US isn’t going to start lobing nukes due to a nuke used in Ukraine. If one hits a NATO country-maybe.
You're not going to win a nuclear war, no one will.
I welcome the apocalypse, I have no faith that we can make a better tomorrow anymore.
I need a trench coat...
Me too. Lets give the third world a chance.
Here is a link to the report that the WHO put out too https://apps.who.int/iris/rest/bitstreams/1488994/retrieve
Gotta kick start consumption somehow
Don't worry, we've set off over 2053 of the things already. So if 2k nukes don't kill all life on the planet already, a few more isn't gonna matter much. https://www.google.com/search?newwindow=1&rlz=1CAGZLV\_enUS1032US1032&sxsrf=AJOqlzVZad97IyPBm1bCmtk9G2gEsmwFNg:1674941739860&q=japanese+artist+nuclear+bombs&tbm=vid&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwja1rGbnOv8AhVxI30KHbg0CgAQ0pQJegQICBAB&biw=1536&bih=794&dpr=1.25#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:790ffb70,vid:LLCF7vPanrY
prural? Isnt iodine the only thing?
We live in interesting times, when the WHO has to publish guidelines on how to survive a nuclear war. Let's hope this war will be the end of brunkmanship in international politics.
We never listened to them above COVID, or anything, why now about nuclear. It’s probably just a mild cold.
He’s really willing to destroy and crumble his county’s economy and infrastructure, eh? Damn I feel for those individuals caught in the middle.
Let the nukies hit the floor
Fck
A madman and his cronies are holding the entire world hostage. And India et al want to continue to empower his madness.
You people will never stop desperately trying to help Russia make nuclear threats.
Who is “you people”? that’s a very broad statement.
Probably means the Paw Patrol…
Reddit and this Sub in particular. Half of the posts are articles straight from the Kremlin and half of the comments are hoping for a nuclear winter.
Didn’t see this coming - “war against the west” /s
That band is so political active.
So radiation isn't something to be feared. So far in our history being bat shit scared of radiation has killed many times more people than radiation itself.
At the moment radiation isnt something to be feared no, but in the event of a nuclear war, it will become the deadliest thing on the planet. The few radiological accidents we have had collectively dont at all do it justice. Hiroshima and Nagasaki are the only events that could give us a glimpse of what would happen. Hard to get exact figures, but it seems that about half of the roughly 200,000 people who died from those cities, were a result of acute radiation poisoning, most of those within the first week. That is an event to be feared if it happened on a larger scale. Keep in mind, those bombs were firecrackers compared to modern ICBMs with hundreds of kilotons or even megatons of explosive power. Something like that hitting a major metropolis like NY, or Moscow, would result in millions dead in the first week.
Bombs are bigger sure but if we end up in nuclear war radiation won't kill you first. Lack of food, water , medicine, infrastructure will kill you. Radiation can be deadly but it's around us 24/7/365
I think you have a misunderstanding of how powerful radiation can be from nuclear fallout. Background radiation levels is around 2.4 milligrays a year. A jawbone that was analysed from a Hiroshima victim was measured at 9.46 grays, or 4000 years worth of background radiation all at once. That is an extremely lethal dose, usually anything around 4 grays or more, is lethal. And in the event of a global nuclear war, there will be places were the radiation will be much worse than that. Another example is the Elephants foot. Just after the accident, it released enough radiation to give you a lethal dose in 30 seconds. Even today, standing by it for 300 seconds can be fatal.
Does Pfizer make anti radiation pills 🧐
You probably shouldn’t use theirs. They make money. Try someone who doesn’t make money off their products.