Talk:Human radiation experiments
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] POV problems
This article seems based around a somewhat sensationalistic and journalistic account of the historical accounts. It needs more insight from more sober, scholarly, and straightforward accounts. I'll try to incorporate some of the material from Barton C. Hacker, Elements of controversy: the Atomic Energy Commission and radiation safety in nuclear weapons testing, 1947-1974 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994). At the moment the page is entirely slanted towards the more sensationalistic approach, and calling some of these things "experiments" is a little off (Castle Bravo was not a "fallout test" under any sober interpretation even if it was a complete and reckless bungle). --Fastfission 17:33, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
I feel a lot more citations are required. The 2nd paragraph under Fallout Research needs to be rewritten as I feel it is written as a personal account. There are no citations in Project Sunshine either. (unknown user 27/4/2006)
-
- I don't see where the tone here is biased. The article simply states the facts as they stand and does not elaborate on them or use sensational or overly emotional language. The facts themselves are somewhat alarming, but that does not mean the article is biased as long as the facts are, in fact, supportable truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.33.84.121 (talk) 14:11, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Inconsistent information from external source
"829 pregnant mothers received what they were told were vitamin drinks that would improve the health of their babies, but were, in fact, mixtures containing radioactive iron, to determine how fast the radio iodine crossed into the placenta"
Err, are we talking about iron or is it iodine? The sentence above is a contraction of the quotes of two different speakers and it does not make much sense in its current form. Alef0 20:50, 5 June 2007 (UTC)