<p>Yesh, don’t need to be so damn defensive.</p>
<p>Anyway, back to the OP’s original topic:</p>
<p>Kyoto is a must. A few other citys stand out to me as well (Negoya (sp fail?) and Osaka).</p>
<p>Expect some form of foriegner dislike.</p>
<p>Polite is always the best way to go about things.</p>
<p>Knowing some phrases before hand would be a good idea (where is the library and such).</p>
<p>Bug spray… just do it.</p>
<p>If i remember more i’ll add more :)</p>
<p>Icedragon,</p>
<p>Good call on Kyoto. Personally, I find Nagoya a bit boring, although the zoo is good. Nara is definitely worth going to, as is Himeji castle. Osaka is a bit of a mixed bag - I lived there for a year and loved it, but it is pretty much another city. Wakayama to the south is fantastic though.</p>
<p>Foreigner dislike? Granted I’ve only lived here 4 years, but I have never really experienced much foreigner dislike by Japanese. If anything, quite the opposite. I have dozens of friends here, and have found Japanese to be polite, shy yet friendly. It does depend on the person however - they don’t tolerate the rude or ignorant very well. </p>
<p>Bottom line, if visitors to Japan are polite and have a bit of respect for Japanese culture and people, that respect will be repaid many times over.</p>
<p>I lived in Tokyo for 6 months - had a great experience there! If you need some help PM me, I can put you in touch with a friend in Tokyo.</p>
<p>I’ve never found the Japanese to be anything but polite. One thing we did when I visited my sil’s family in Hiroshima was go here: [Itsukushima</a> Shrine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itsukushima_Shrine]Itsukushima”>Itsukushima Shrine - Wikipedia) The same friendly deer as at Nara, monkeys at the top of the mountain, and yummy mochi swwets: <a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dai***u[/url]”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dai***u</a>.</p>
<p>Another thing that my kids enjoyed tremendously was the [Kinugawa</a> Onsen Travel: Nikko Edomura (Edo Wonderland)](<a href=“http://www.japan-guide.com/e/e3879.html]Kinugawa”>Edo Wonderland Nikko Edomura - Kinugawa Onsen Travel) north of Tokyo - it’s like a cross between a Renaissance Faire and Disneyland. Even without speaking Japanese we could understand most of the playlets. And the kids (and grownups) adored the Illusion House.</p>
<p>[Iodine</a> | Radiation Protection | US EPA](<a href=“http://epa.gov/radiation/radionuclides/iodine.html]Iodine”>http://epa.gov/radiation/radionuclides/iodine.html)</p>
<p>To Biologyguy#10. There are two radioactive isotopes of iodine - the other has a half life of 15million years, not 8.2. The chart you linked to in your second post does not specify different types of radiation.</p>
<p>Parent, </p>
<p>That’s true - Iodine-129, but we don’t worry about long-lived isotopes generally - they are long-lived because they decay slowly. If they decay slowly then they only release alpha or beta particles rarely, and so therefore is very unlikely to damage DNA causing cancer.</p>
<p>We only really worry about I-131, partly because it’s a direct product of the type of reactor we are dealing with (in terms of the fuel), and because it decays fast, releasing all those lovely beta particles, which ionize every 3000th molecule they hit. Anyway, its half life is 8 days, so now, nearly 6 months after the disaster there is practically none left. </p>
<p>ALL the medical advise I have seen (and believe me, living here and having family here, I check) has said the same thing. In the days immediately following a nuclear accident, a KI supply is good to have. However, because excess iodine is excreted quickly from the body (and the reason to take KI is to saturate the thyroid, where the radioiodine would accumulate [normally only in children] and destroy, so you don’t want it excreted), it is best not to take it too early. </p>
<p>Finally, a significant proportion of people are allegic to KI. This is an allergy which cannot be practically tested for, and could result in the death of the person you are trying to protect. In people’s panic, they take a ‘remedy’ for a problem which doesn’t practically exist, and the remedy kills them. Ironic, no?</p>
<p>Thanks again, biologyguy</p>
<p>My pleasure. I only hope I can assuage a few fears. Due to Chernobyl and a huge amount of scaremongering by “environmental” organizations (not all of which are bad, but some undoubtedly are - and I say that as an environmentalist and biologist myself), radiation has a far more scary image than it really deserves. We all live with radiation every day; radon gas from the rocks, emissions from the CRT screen you’re reading this on, the flight to see your grandmother in Denver (double dose!), and we don’t really worry about it.<br>
Don’t get me wrong. There are times to be worried. There are legitamate reasons to be scared of radiation. However, unless you are planning to use the reactor core as a hot-tub, I think this is not one of those times. Happily.</p>