Why comparison to airplane trip is a logical fallacy

While I am very VERY grateful to UC Berkeley for making the effort to measure the rain water and air, even during Spring Break, and also inform us of their findings, I must argue that the comparison between radiation particles and airplane flights is not logically sound. Here are some quotes:

This is in regards to a TSA scan but it makes some good points: "With respect to errors in the safety reports and/or misleading information about them, the statement that one scan is equivalent to 2-3 minutes of your flight is VERY misleading. Most cosmic radiation is composed of high energy particles that passes right through our body and the plane itself without being absorbed. The spectrum that is dangerous is known as ionizing radiation and most of that is absorbed by the hull of the airplane. So relating non-absorbing cosmic radiation to tissue absorbing man-made radiation is simply misleading and wrong. Of course these are related and there is over-lap, but we have to compare apples to apples." http://www.examiner.com/natural-health-in-houston/is-radiation-exposure-...

Comparing a TSA scan to a particle is also not a direct comparison. If you compare a particle inside the body to something it should be another kind of ingestion of a particle inside the body that is giving off alpha, beta or gamma radiation. Even then, you would have to specify how it interacts with the biology. More quotes:

"Oh. And if anyone tells you that the amount of radiation you'll receive from slightly tainted milk is a fraction of the exposure from eating a banana on an airplane, or talking on a cell phone at Grand Central Station, ask them this: 'When was the last time YOU saw a person eating a banana on an airplane or chatting on a BlackBerry at a train terminal with their thyroid gland dangling outside their body?' Such trivializations don't make any sense. Also, do you know of any cell phone that emits ionizing radiation? If you know of one, I'd be interested in hearing about it. Do your homework before you put more of their mental garbage in your head about radiation." http://idealist.ws/

"...the danger in drinking alpha particles is that you bring them inside your body and right up against sensitive organs, where the alpha particles can damage DNA and create a possible mutation in your cells. He says the more you drink, the more you raise your risk for cancer. In fact, even the EPA says "a single ‘‘wild’’ cell can give rise to a cancer” and that for alpha “a single alpha passing through a cell is sufficient to induce a mutational event.” The EPA made the disclosure in the federal register as part of the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations 2000 final rule that regulates all forms of radioactive elements in drinking water..." (this is about alpha but beta and gamma do a lot of damage as well ) http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=191678.0;wap2

"Cesium-137, a beta emitter with a gamma component, is biologically significant due to its energy level, its long half-life, its ubiquitous production during the fission process, and its tendency to follow the potassium cycle in nature, giving a whole body dose to those who ingest it." http://www.davistownmuseum.org/cbm/Rad2.html

The problem has to do with accumulation...We all need to keep our diets high in iodine for the next few months, and if we get thyroid or breast cancer GE, TEPCO and their stockholders, and the regulatory people who let that plant be built need to pay for the treatment, as well as any emotional suffering endured! They owe the entire planet treatment for PTSD even now.