• Sheryl and Dan Malin


Happy Saturday,

I’m going to start right away blogging on how passionate was my decision 10 years ago on going to Mexico for cancer treatment. I started this blog and website, in the beginning to connect with my family and friends on my everyday experience.

As time went by, I wrote a book showing my journey through a different method other than the conventional ways. Unfortunately, two years later Dan, was diagnosed with prostate cancer. I have been very honest and to the point with our journey through this blog.


BUSY DAY AHEAD OF FUNCTIONAL MEDICINE Since it was a busy day I do not have time to write a lot because I am being transferred from room to room for different types of treatment. I have decided to have Sherry take movies of my day. STEM CELL TREATMENT Oct 25, 2012

So, I will continue with the next chapter of managing cancer. Even though we have changed our lifestyle and continually managing our health, we still can enjoy life with the type of treatments that we chose. If you have been following the last six months of our journey, Dan has been on Humana and has utilized the conventional healthcare of which we’ve been to conventional doctors. From the very being we have been asking for a Pet Scan to be done for Dan’s PSA was a little high. Although, our family doctor and two Urologists refused to order it, instead wanted to order a Bone Scan. Whether, to put fear in our minds, it worked for a little while! There has been no cancer detected in any of the scans or MRI’s, but they continued to want to do conventional treatments on him.


WRAPPING UP MY TREATMENTS OF FUNCTIONAL MEDICINE Today ended up as a big blur, a lot happened. But first a hot cup of coffee and breakfast. Sherry took some more movies to describe the treatments that I received today. Besides those procedures I also had ozone and IV's I am tired and have a headache so having some pain medicine and going to sleep. Tomorrow is another day and will be my last day of treatments. Take care all until tomorrow. Oct 30, 2012

So, to make a long story short, we have gotten a functional medicine doctor here and decided to go back to our doctor in TJ, Mexico for a booster and the Pet Scan. We are leaving August 3rd for about 10 days. Dan did a lot of research and found Delta airlines the best to travel during these uncertain times. They practice a safe corona virus protocol and our functional medicine doctor told us about this organic spray we can use on our bodies to fight auto immune issues. Our daughter – Danielle made and also purchased masks for us to wear. We are all set; all we need is your prayers that everything works out.

Back to pollution, what is nuclear waste, and what do we do with it?

The world has today 546 nuclear plants generating electricity. Their experience is being continuously researched, and feedback should be provided to all. Nuclear scientists have to interact with the people of the nation, and academic institutions continuously update nuclear power generation technology and safety. A. P. J. Abdul Kalam

The electricity generated from nuclear reactors results in small amounts of waste and has been managed responsibly since the dawn of civil nuclear power. There are several management strategies in practice, such as direct disposal or reuse in reactors to generate more low-carbon electricity. ​

Like all industries and energy-producing technologies, the use of nuclear energy results in some waste products. There are three types of nuclear waste, classified according to their radioactivity: low-, intermediate-, and high-level. The vast majority of the waste (90% of total volume) is composed of only lightly-contaminated items, such as tools and work clothing, and contains only 1% of the total radioactivity.

By contrast, high-level waste – mostly comprising used nuclear (sometimes referred to as spent) fuel that has been designated as waste from the nuclear reactions – accounts for just 3% of unlike any other energy generating industry, the nuclear sector takes full responsibility for all of its waste. Many permanent disposal facilities are in operation for low- and intermediate-level waste, and facilities for high-level waste and used nuclear fuel are under implementation and facilities under construction.

Little waste is generated: Nuclear fuel is very energy dense, so very little of it is required to produce immense amounts of electricity – especially when compared to other energy sources. As a result, a correspondingly small amount of waste is produced. On average, the waste from a reactor supplying a person’s electricity needs for a year would be about the size of a brick. Only 5 grams of this is high-level waste – about the same weight as a sheet of paper.

The generation of electricity from a typical 1,000-megawatt nuclear power station, which would supply the needs of more than a million people, produces only three cubic meters of vitrified high-level waste per year, if the used fuel is recycled. In comparison, a 1,000-megawatt coal-fired power station produces approximately 300,000 tons of ash and more than 6 million tons of carbon dioxide, every year total volume of waste, but contains 95% of the total radioactivity.

Perceived health risks Since the dawn of the civil nuclear power industry, nuclear waste has never caused harm to people. The popular misconception is that because certain parts of nuclear waste remain radioactive for billions of years, then the threat must be sustained for that period.

However, this is not the case. Whilst remaining weakly radioactive for a few hundred thousand years, the radioactivity from the main component of the waste which could cause health problems will have decayed to safe levels within a few hundred years. A key factor in understanding why nuclear waste repositories do not pose a health threat also stems from the fact that the quantity of materials which would be found in the environment in the event of a leak would be very small. The amount of radioactive materials that would enter the environment would make no difference to the natural environment or future humans.

After all, the environment we live in, as well as the human body, is naturally radioactive. Radiation is an unavoidable part of life on our planet, and life evolved and is thriving in this radioactive environment, and the doses from a nuclear waste repository would be almost 50 times smaller than the average background radiation.

Different options: Used nuclear fuel is kept in either wet or dry storage facilities, before being recycled or disposed of. When used fuel is taken out of a reactor, it is both hot and radioactive and requires storage in water to allow the fuel to cool.

The fuel can be kept in wet storage, or transferred into a dry facility after a period of initial cooling. Keeping the used fuel in temporary storage to allow both the heat and radioactivity to diminish makes the recycling and disposal easier.

There are two main waste management strategies that exist across the world: some countries have been recycling used nuclear fuel for decades. Others have opted for direct disposal. This is fundamentally a strategic decision, taken at a national level and mainly driven by political and economic, as well as technological, considerations.

Recycling: Although some countries, most notably the USA, treat used nuclear fuel as waste, most of the material in used fuel can be recycled.

Approximately 97% – the vast majority (~94%) being uranium – of it could be used as fuel in certain types of reactor. Recycling has, to date, mostly been focused on the extraction of plutonium and uranium, as these elements can be reused in conventional reactors. This separated plutonium and uranium can subsequently be mixed with fresh uranium and made into new fuel rods.

Countries such as France, Japan, Germany, Belgium and Russia have all used plutonium recycling to generate electricity, whilst also reducing the radiological footprint of their waste. Some of the by-products (approximately 4%), mainly the fission products, will still require disposal in a repository and are immobilized by mixing them with glass, through a process called vitrification.

Direct disposal: Direct disposal is, as the name suggests, a management strategy where used nuclear fuel is designated as waste and disposed of in an underground repository, without any recycling. The used fuel is placed in canisters which, in turn, are placed in tunnels and subsequently sealed with rocks and clay.

The waste from recycling – the so-called fission products – will also be placed in the repository.

Repositories are nearing completion in for instance Finland.

Nuclear power plants must be prepared to withstand everything from earthquakes to tsunamis, from fires to floods to acts of terrorism. Ban Ki-moon

Nuclear waste does affect us and we do need to be aware of the affects! It is extremely difficult to measure the impacts of radiation on human body, because of the “hidden” way it changes our body cells. One thing which remains clear, is that apart from the acute radiation symptoms like seizures or hair loss, radioactive substances cause serious long-term health problems.

Many of these problems are of such character that doctors cannot determine if they were ultimately caused by radiation or other factors such as unhealthy lifestyle, genetics.

Here are some of the chronical health issues from radiation are: gastrointestinal diseases, cardiovascular diseases, diseases of the nervous system, diabetes, cancers (lung, skin, breast, stomach and other).

What can we do as a society? If not for long-term radioactive waste, then nuclear power would be the ultimate “green” energy. The alternative to uranium is thorium, a radioactive ore whose natural decay is responsible for half of our geothermal energy, which we think of as “green energy.” More than 20 years of research at the European Centre for Nuclear Research, the birthplace of the internet and where Higgs boson was discovered, demonstrate that thorium could become a radically disruptive source of clean energy providing bountiful electricity any place and at any time.

Coal and gas remain by far the largest sources of electricity worldwide, threatening our climate equilibrium. Non-fossil alternatives, such as solar power, use up a forbidding amount of land, even in sunny California, plus the decommissioning will pose a serious recycling challenge within 20 years.


Good morning Saturday 🌞 to change yourself effectively, we first have to change our perception 🦋 have a fantastic weekend. SMILE 😊 LAUGH 😁 GIGGLE 🤗

Solar is best used on an individual household basis, rather than centralized plants. Wind requires an even larger surface area than solar.

An Accelerator-Driven System, as the process is called, comprises an assembly of key technologies developed at CERN: an accelerated proton beam focuses on a metal target, usually lead, in a process called spallation. This spawns neutrons that in turn convert thorium into fissile uranium233, producing heat by way of nuclear fission. The heavy uranium233 nuclei divide into smaller nucleus such as zirconium or xenon, with only minimal radioactive waste produced.

The advantages of an ADS over other energy production process are many:

Clean: No emissions are produced (CO2, nitrogen or Sulphur oxides particles, among others), unlike with fossil fuel. Heat is generated from the transmutation of thorium into the highly radioactive uranium233 and its subsequent fission into smaller particles.

Feasible: ADS technology development has been proven to be a bounded problem with a realistic development timeline. In comparison, fusion is an unbounded problem that does not have a constrained development timeline.

Transmutation of nuclear waste: the ADS process has been proven to transmute long-term nuclear waste, harmful for 240,000 years or more, into short-term radioactivity waste of less than 500 years toxicity. The technology would solve the intractable problem of very long-term radioactive waste storage.

No military usage: The International Atomic Energy Agency has repeatedly stated that the technology is “intrinsically proliferation resistant.”

Large thorium reserves: enough for 20 centuries at 2018 level of global electricity consumption. Thorium is well distributed around the globe, with no nation having a monopoly.

High energy density: 1 ton of thorium would provide the energy equivalent of 3 million tons of coal, or 200 tons of natural uranium enriched for use in a nuclear reactor.

Inherent safety: the process operates at atmospheric pressure therefore the plant can’t explode (unlike Chernobyl). The reaction is also stopping immediately when the proton beam is interrupted, providing inherent safety.

Smart grid friendly: Immediate ON/OFF capability would make ADS power plants ideal for base load energy production for smart grids.

Small footprint: A 500MW ADS plant would only be as large as a medium size factory, compared to 26 km2 (10 mi2) for the 550MW Topaz solar farm in the sunny California desert. In the wintery north-west, an equivalent solar farm would be almost three times larger, approximately 62 km2. Wind turbines require even more space.

Proximity: inherent safety and small size make ADS ideally suited for any use, industrial or urban, and able to be located in remote regions, including high latitudes with little sunshine.

Decarbonized hydrogen production: reactors could be set close to abundant freshwater at high latitudes for clean hydrogen production, allowing the conversion of electrons into a green gas used for transport, heating and industrial processes.

I think we should stop using nuclear power plants because it's an old system that we can't control. Hayao Miyazaki

To close out the blog today, is everybody ready for another recipe! Would love to hear from you or even see some of your creative recipes.


Here's what's cooking at Sherry's

Until tomorrow, don’t worry be happy. Worry is a misuse of imagination.

This site was designed with the
website builder. Create your website today.
Start Now