I've been wondering since pretty early on in the show if my idea of radioactivity is slightly demonized - or of the writers' is slightly played down? Or does it just fall in the middle?
I grew up in the eighties, I was eleven when the Chernobyl reactor rendered the entire region around it inhabitable for decades to come, the arms race between the US and the USSR was in full swing, and I was fairly convinced that the world would not live to see the year 2000 (apart from a couple of cockroaches). Radiactivity of every description was the stuff of 90% of my nightmares.
I know that Europe has been pickier about nuclear anythings than the US have been (I had a Bugs Bunny comic when I was a child, in which Bugs had a glow-in-the-dark radiactive alarm clock, and I was terrified), but on Heroes, radioactivity's main feat seems to be heat, and after the first half of the first season, it always comes off as pretty "clean". Before that, it was established how destructive Ted's powers were - accidentally killing his wife, making the grass die when he visits her grave, and Audrey Hanson makes it very clear to Matt that radiation could become a problem during Ted's interrogation.
And then it sort of becomes insignificant. I was under the impression that a considerate amount of radiation was necessary before anything started to burn, and that this amount of radiation was able to kill very effectively if unspectacularly (like it did Ted's wife). Matt and the Bennets (minus Claire) should have felt the effects when Ted set their house on fire. I wouldn't be surprised if the cancer rate in Odessa, TX would go up. Noah and Matt got another helping of it in Kirby Plaza, Matt yet another in the Company vault. Makes you kind of happy he left his pregnant wife.
Considering the severity of Nathan's burns and his proximity to Peter when the latter exploded, he would probably have died of radioactive contamination weeks or even months before Adam ever reached him.
What do you think?