Fukushima's "DEADLY" reactors have killed and most likely will end up directly killing ZERO people. Doesn't sound very "DEADLY" to me and using the word "DEADLY" 100 times in an article doesn't make it true. Proper and ethical journalism/media would report this as "potentially deadly" at most. "DEADLY" means that it has killed....which in fact it has not. "The disaster was the worst nuclear incident since the Chernobyl meltdown of 1986" or you could truthfully report that it's the ONLY incident (for commercial nuclear power in the WHOLE WORLD) since the stupid Soviets decided to be complete lunatics with their terrible design of a reactor. The earthquake and resulting tsunami that killed almost 20,000 people was a "disaster". What happened at Fukushima as a result....not even close.
The heart of EVERY reactor is deadly in theory....and UNDER vessel is not the "HEART" of the reactor.
They have quite the mess to clean up no doubt, although overall it doesn't look as bad as I feared. Still, a pretty piss poor article filled with inaccuracies (holes in the reactor "floor", camera on a 50ft rod inserted into the reactor) on top of using the words "doomed" and "disaster" multiple times.
