Reply #16: Sarcasm?

[NickB79]

Because if it was, I found an interesting statement regarding Hiroshima survivors cancer rates:

"A-bomb survivors (from Hiroshima and Nagasaki) who had large doses—greater than the equivalent of 150 years of background—had a slight increase in cancer. In the last 50 years there was an average of fewer than 10 radiation-induced cancer deaths per year in about 100,000 A-bomb survivors. A-bomb survivors who received a dose less than the equivalent of 60 years of background showed no increase in the incidence of cancer. Survivors in that dose range tended to be healthier than the unexposed Japanese. That is, their death from all causes was lower than for the unexposed Japanese. The improved health of those with low doses more than compensated for the radiation-induced cancer deaths, so that A-bomb survivors as a group are living longer on the average than the unexposed Japanese controls."

http://www.emedicinehealth.com/articles/12071-3.asp

So yes, it appears they very well may live longer and healthier lives with a lower rate of cancer.