Original poster of the example here. Basically, I put it there because it\'s a terminology mistake. As [=ActualScientist=] pointed out, \
Original poster of the example here. Basically, I put it there because it\\\'s a terminology mistake. As [=ActualScientist=] pointed out, \\\"meltdown\\\" specifically refers to the fuel rods melting down. Fusion reactors don\\\'t \\\'\\\'have\\\'\\\' fuel rods, so this falls under \\\"fusion = fission BUT MORE!\\\"
Besides which (and yes, I\\\'m going off on a tangent), any intelligently designed fusion reactor (which admittedly is rare in sci-fi) would have hardware failsafes (using the bare minimum fuel flow to keep the reactor running, the deadman switch principle, etc.) to prevent the kind of tampering of which EDI speaks. Even the \\\'\\\'Star Trek Technical Manual\\\'\\\' basically says that core ejection failures so often seen in TNG equate to the writers not reading their own reference material: they\\\'re electromagnets holding the core in place and require power to \\\'\\\'not\\\'\\\' work. Realistically, the best EDI could do is trip the failsafes and cause the reactor to shut down (which still leaves the ship without power, so the \\\'\\\'Normandy\\\'\\\' comes out on top anyway).