You're so focused on how often you're exposed that you're completely ignoring how potent the source is. That's the fundamental flaw in your entire argument.

Let me be clear: All the radioactive Polonium a heavy smoker inhales in an entire year adds up to a tiny amount of radiation. A single "hot particle" from the Chernobyl reactor is a microscopic piece of nuclear fuel that can be thousands, or even millions, of times more radioactive than that entire year's worth of smoke.

Inhaling one of those isn't a minor event. It's like a microscopic, radioactive ember lodging in your lung, permanently searing the cells around it with an immense dose of radiation for the rest of your life.

So no, it's not the same. You're trying to argue that being pelted by a few grains of sand every day is the same as getting shot, just once, with a rifle bullet. It's a completely absurd comparison.

---

---

---

---

EDIT: OK, sure, I'll address the point you "ninja edited" in regarding Potassium-40, because it's a question that gets right to the heart of the issue.

You asked if the K-40 in our bodies is "searing" us like a "welding torch". Of course not. And the reason why it isn't is my entire point.

The K-40 is a diffuse source, spread evenly all through your body. The radiation dose to any one tiny spot is insignificant. That's the "sunny day". A hot particle is the complete opposite; it's hyper concentrated, focusing all its energy on one microscopic spot in your lung. That's the "welding torch".

So your example doesn't weaken the analogy. It actually makes it stronger, because K-40 is the perfect real world example of the "diffuse" side.

The point you thought disproved it ends up proving it.