Compare that to what is being released from, say, Fukushima. It bio-accumulates and ends up sitting inside your organs for decades, slowly irradiating them.
Please provide specific isotopes if you're going to make a counter argument like this. This is not true, where are you getting this opinion from?
Although the radiation level is low it is also constant, which is why your risk of getting cancer goes up.
If it is so low and constant then it is similar to background radiation, where background radiation is defined below.
Your statement linking any amount of radiation to an increase in cancer follows well with the early experiments in the pre-1960's evidence where there was not a lot of data for chronic low-dose cases (called the Linear Non-Threshold Model: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L... ) but you cannot truthfully make that statement when in reality the affects of low-doses of radiation has experimentally been shown to be actually helpful in preventing cancer, where the Radiation Hormesis model more accurately describes what actually happens http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R... .
Background Radiation: Radiation is present at all locations where people live and comes from various sources (solar radiation, terrestrial radiation from the ground), and this level of background radiation changes with people’s everyday activities (eating certain foods, flying on a plane, getting an x-ray, where they live on the Earth). However, human bodies are designed to live in an environment with ever-constant radiation at the levels we experience here on Earth. The tiny amount of radiation that comes from a nuclear reactor is the same type of radiation that can be found through these natural sources, and because the radiation from nuclear energy is far below natural levels, there is no threat to a person who comes into contact with it.