Radiation risks from Fukushima 'no longer negligible'

[robdogbucky]

"The risks associated with iodine-131 contamination in Europe are no longer "negligible," according to CRIIRAD, a French research body on radioactivity. The NGO is advising pregnant women and infants against "risky behaviour," such as consuming fresh milk or vegetables with large leaves.

In response to thousands of inquiries from citizens concerned about fallout from the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Europe, CRIIRAD has compiled an information package on the risks of radioactive iodine-131 contamination in Europe.

The document, published on 7 April, advises against consuming rainwater and says vulnerable groups such as children and pregnant or breastfeeding women should avoid consuming vegetables with large leaves, fresh milk and creamy cheese...

...CRIIRAD says its information note is not limited to the situation in France and is applicable to other European countries, as the level of air contamination is currently the same in Belgium, Germany, Italy and Switzerland, for instance. Data for the west coast of the United States, which received the Fukushima radioactive fallout 6-10 days before France, reveals that levels of radioactive iodine-131 concentration are 8-10 times higher there, the institute says..."

http://www.euractiv.com/en/health/radiation-risks-fukushima-longer-negligible-news-503947

[robdogbucky]

1. EPA: New Radiation Highs in Little Rock Milk, Philadelphia Drinking Water

"Milk from Little Rock and drinking water from Philadelphia contained the highest levels of Iodine-131 from Japan yet detected by the Environmental Protection Agency, according to data released by EPA Saturday.

The Philadelphia sample is below the EPA’s maximum contaminant level (MCL) for iodine-131, but the Little Rock sample is almost three times higher.

Nonetheless, the EPA does not consider the milk dangerous because the MCL is set for long-term exposure, and the iodine-131 from Japan’s Fukushima-Daichi nuclear accident is expected to be temporary and deteriorate rapidly.
The EPA’s MCL for iodine-131 is 3 picoCuries per liter.

The Little Rock milk sample contained 8.9 picoCuries per liter. It was collected on March 30..."

http://blogs.forbes.com/jeffmcmahon/2011/04/10/epa-new-radiation-highs-in-little-rock-milk-philadelphia-drinking-water/

[Rex]

5. So that's why the Repukes want to gut the EPA

[JohnyCanuck]

2. K&R n/t

[Taverner]

3. Question: will Reverse Osmosis water filter this out?

[jeff47]

7. Depends on the system

Theoretically, reverse osmosis can result in nothing but 100% H20. However, such systems are massive, expensive and difficult to operate. So they aren't on the home market.

Home units vary pretty wildly on how effective they actually are. And that's assuming the unit isn't malfunctioning.

[in_cog_ni_to]

8. THIS system filters radiation particles:

The red Cross uses this system in disaster zones and this company sent their system to Japan.


http://www.amazon.com/Katadyn-Drip-Gravidyn-Water-Filter/dp/B0007U011G/ref=sr_1_11?s=sporting-goods&ie=UTF8&qid=1302551362&sr=1-11

Extra filters:

http://www.amazon.com/Katadyn-20720-Gravidyn-Replacement-Element/dp/B0007U011Q/ref=pd_bxgy_sg_text_b

[animato]

18. Thanks for the link, where does it say it can filter radiation particles?

Inquiring worried minds want to know!

[in_cog_ni_to]

23. Here:

This Katadyn Gravidyn Drip Water Filter System (2110080) is a high performance free standing gravity water filter with utilizes three advanced Katadyn ceramic filters (20720) with activated carbon granulate for maximum water filtration. It has a 2.6 gallon (10 liter) capacity for larger quantities of water and is especially useful for large groups of people.

With this Katadyn Gravidyn drip water filter, there is no need for pumping or connection to a tap because it uses gravitational filter action. It is ideal for construction sites, camping, hunting, fishing, campers, boats, cabins, cottages, and so on. The three Katadyn ceramic depth filters with included activated carbon granules removes bacteria, cysts, algae, protozoa, sediment, dirt, spores, some viruses, and other disease causing agents down to the 0.2 micron level. The Gravidyn will also reduce some chemicals and radioactive particles. With this Katadyn water filter system you can drink safely from streams, rivers, and lakes. The Gravidyn gravity drip filter system will reduce organisms that cause such diseases as cholera, dysentery, typhoid fever, and giardia.

Since this gravity drip filter system has no moving parts, maintenance and use is simple. A measuring gauge is supplied with this Katadyn filter in order to easily remind you when it is time to change the filter elements.

Katadyn filters are used by the U.S. military, international militaries, and by relief agencies like the Red Cross which utilize Katadyn filters in emergency situations where clean drinking water is scarce.

http://www.filtersfast.com/P-Katadyn-Gravidyn-Drip-Water-Filter.asp

[girl gone mad]

15. Probably.

Reverse osmosis can filter particles as small as 100 picometers. Iodine is larger than 200 picometers. It should work theoretically. I don't know how these systems vary from a practical standpoint.

[BobbyBoring]

89. I've had one for years

And would NEVER be without one. You do have to change the filters twice a year and the membrane every year or so, but it's well worth it.

In fact, I'm gonna change all my filters NOW!

[Altoid_Cyclist]

4. I'm sure that the corporate media will have extensive coverage of this.

Oh wait....that's right, there's a royal wedding that's FAR more important.

GE...we bring good things to life. :sarcasm:

[damntexdem]

6. They were never negligible.

They're just no longer denied.

[franzia99]

30. The saying used to be that no amount of radiation is safe.

We saw that once the accident occurred Japan more than doubled the legal limit that people can be exposed to. Time and again we see that once a disaster occurs governments will redefine safe. It's because this happened under the current leaders' watch and they're trying to avoid paying a political cost for it as best they can. Plus there will be issues of liability in the future and no one responsible is going to enjoy paying for the damage to peoples' health.

[suffragette]

9. One of the more informative articles I've read

with details on impact from various levels in different foods and milks, of current levels in that range and of comparing the measurement rates/terms to exposure rates/ terms.

Example:
CRIIRAD notes that the amount of iodine-131 capable of delivering a dose of 10 mSv varies greatly depending on the age of consumers. Children up to two years old are the most vulnerable and ingestion of 50 becquerel (Bq) is enough to deliver to the body a dose of 10 mSv, according to the institute.

If the foods (leafy vegetables, milk etc.) contain between one and 10 Bq per kg or more, it is possible that the reference level of 10 mSv may be exceeded within two to three weeks, the institute added.

Radioactive iodine-131 values measured by the French Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety (IRSN) in recent days show the following, varying levels of contamination: 0,08 Bq/kg in salad, spinach and leeks in Aix-en-Provence, 0,17 Bq per litre in milk in Lourdes and 2,1 Bq per litre in goats milk in Clansayes.




Wish we were receiving that type of specific and timely information here.

[robdogbucky]

10. Vancouver, Canada radiation tests show iodine-131 in rainwater

at almost 100 times above US drinking water limit

Radiation from Japan reaches B.C. shores, Simon Fraser University Media Release:

"The jet stream is carrying the radiation from Japan to North America. Most of the radioactivity disperses in the atmosphere and falls over the Pacific Ocean on its way over, but some of it has now reached the west coast, falling down with rain, and mixing with seawater. It’s also accumulating in seaweed.

The rainwater tested was collected at SFU’s campus on Burnaby Mountain and in downtown Vancouver, while seaweed samples were collected in North Vancouver near the Seabus terminal. Researchers began monitoring rainwater earlier this month but did not see the signature for iodine-131 in samples taken March 16 and March 18. However, they did detect the radioisotope’s signature in samples from March 19, 20 and 25.

Here are the results from the tests (measured in decays of iodine-131 per second per litre of rainwater – Bq/l):

* March 18: 0 (2) Bq/l
* March 19: 9 (2) Bq/l
* March 20: 12 (2) Bq/l
* March 25: 11 (2) Bq/l
Read the press release here.


Fukushima Forecast: Massive radiation cloud nearing California on April 11

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ieu8UHlRxqo&feature=player_embedded


http://enenews.com/recent-radioactivy-testing-vancouver-canada-shows-iodine-131-rainwater-almost-100-times-above-drinking-water-limit


"...Me, I'm waiting so patiently

Lying on the floor

I'm just trying to do my jig-saw puzzle

Before it rains anymore..."

Jagger/Richards

[robdogbucky]

11. Update from TOD on today's aftershock:

"Yet another large aftershock shook the region around the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, causing a brief evacuation of workers and an interruption to the electricity flow to external pumps used to provide fresh water to cool the reactor pressure vessels and spent fuel ponds. The injection of nitrogen into the No. 1 reactor pressure vessel, aimed at reducing the risk of additional hydrogen explosions, has also resumed. However, the pressure is rising slower than expected, suggesting a possible leak.

The International Atomic Energy Agency status summary for April 11 shows no substantial change over the past few days:

Note that while freshwater is being injected, it is not being cycled. Added water replaces that lost due to evaporation (which provides cooling) and leakage (unknown extent, but which could add to the volume of radioactive water flooding certain areas of the plant). Most of that salt added from the seawater used earlier is still there.

The Nuclear Safety Commission of Japan Monday released an estimate that the plant had may have been releasing up to 10,000 terabecquerels or radioactivity per hour at some point. Although it is now estimated to be releasing only 1 terabecquerel per hour, the cumulative burden in the nearby vicinity is still increasing, The government forcing an expansion of the recommended evacuation area."

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/7794#more

[StarsInHerHair]

64. so NOW they're injecting nitrogen, I suggested this option when it 1st

happened, frozen helium & nitrogen, since they're very cold & aren't explosive, I truly wish they had done this MUCH more immediately. Also anti-dusting agents should be dumped all over the Pacific Ocean, by our military, Canada's, Mexico's.......look who is being affected, I'd add lead dust & salt to that too. Better lead than radiation, imo

[Tesha]

84. They're not injecting nitrogen to cool anything, they're just doing it to...

...displace explosive hydrogen gas.

They don't want any more explosions.

Tesha

[CountAllVotes]

12. K&R!

:dem: :kick: :kick: :kick:

[robdogbucky]

13. Coverup continues

Japan may raise nuke accident severity level to highest 7
http://english.kyodonews.jp/news/2011/04/84721.html

The Nuclear Safety Commission of Japan released a preliminary calculation Monday saying that the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant had been releasing up to 10,000 terabecquerels of radioactive materials per hour at some point after a massive quake and tsunami hit northeastern Japan on March 11.

The disclosure prompted the government to consider raising the accident's severity level to 7, the worst on an international scale, from the current 5, government sources said.

And tomorrow they will say "oh no, we made a calculation mistake, it was really only 10 000 nanobecquerels".

The cover up and farce continues.

[suffragette]

24. Interesting info in searching on terabecquerels

From the article you posted:
http://english.kyodonews.jp/news/2011/04/84721.html
According to an evaluation by the INES, level 7 accidents correspond with a release into the external environment radioactive materials equal to more than tens of thousands terabecquerels of radioactive iodine 131. One terabecquerel equals 1 trillion becquerels.

Haruki Madarame, chairman of the commission, which is a government panel, said it has estimated that the release of 10,000 terabecquerels of radioactive materials per hour continued for several hours.





In a quick search, this looks like a related article from 2011/03/26:

http://www.asahi.com/english/TKY201103250204.html

To calculate the spread of radiation using the System for Prediction of Environmental Emergency Dose Information, the Nuclear Safety Commission of Japan estimates the discharge rate for radioactive iodine per hour from the Fukushima plant based on radiation measurements taken at various locations.

Using those figures to make a simple calculation of the amount of discharge between 6 a.m. March 12 and midnight Wednesday results in figures between 30,000 and 110,000 terabecquerels. Tera is a prefix meaning 1 trillion.



Given the info in the newer article about criteria for INES and the info in the older about the high levels, it looks like this should have been raised to a 7 weeks ago.

[Matariki]

14. Fresh milk and leafy vegetables now bad for you.

human beings suck.

[buddysmellgood]

17. There are plenty of alternatives to fresh milk and vegetables.

For example, there is powdered milk and one can color paper leaves with green crayons and eat those.

[Matariki]

21. I'd laugh at your reply, if it wasn't so damn depressing.

[franzia99]

34. agreed

[uppityperson]

25. See! And everyone MOCKED that recommendation of powdered milk & tuna under the bed thing

They WERE right!

[bvar22]

69. Noted!

I'm waiting for Mea Culpas from the Pro-Nukes crowd.




If you're not FOR the WAR in Libya,
you're WITH The Communists AlQaeda The Terrorists Saddam Qaddafi!!!

[kenfrequed]

77. They will be silent

Though probably not as silent as the pro Lieberman crowd was and probably not for as long.

[kenfrequed]

76. hmm

"Once again, the conservative, sandwich-heavy portfolio pays off for the hungry investor..."

[uppityperson]

83. I think of it as a broken clock thing, only though if the clock is one of those old analog round

ones, not a LCD/LED one. In which case a broken clock is a piece of trash.

[Shagbark Hickory]

16. wow. all this mess from just one nuke plant. Imagine if there were several that were leaking. nt

[robdogbucky]

19. Well, Shagbark, to be honest and fair about it

That is an unusual set there at Fukushima, with 6 or so reactors in one place. I think Chernobyl and TMI had only one each.

I'm happy to be corrected though and do not mind. I know the Fukushima disaster would be hard to duplicate in terms of potential for magnitude of disasters. Why did they build this set on the coast (tsunamis) and near so many fault lines? It almost seemed as though they tempted the gods in doing so.

I read one account of the lost continent of Atlantis, that they had been using power sources that made them feel like gods, but it badkfired on them and destroyed their world. Interesting hypothesis, eh?


"...Me, I'm waiting so patiently

Lying on the floor

I'm just trying to do my jig-saw puzzle

Before it rains anymore..."

Jagger/Richards

[Shagbark Hickory]

22. Dude. There's all kinds of half assed countries building nuke plants.

Iran, N. Korea, India. Nothing against those fine countries but come on. These plants require an army of people to operate them. And what's to say that terrorists won't be successful at breaching them?

[robdogbucky]

27. The name is robdog

My point was, this plant and the massive amount of fuel rods there, both active and used, some comprised of MOX, which is weapons grade plutonium and uranium mixture, far exceeds the amount found at any normal plant, under any circumstances. Therefore, follow the dots my friend, the potential for catastrophic damage is so much greater. I doubt anyone has or will build a plant with 6 reactors and what was it, 4 pools of spent rods, sitting on top of 4 of those?

You know those "half assed countries," are doing this all on their own? You're sure of that because I would like to see it. Are you laying blame on their engineers or something? Do you have a link to any source for that? You see, I have worked with a lot engineers and construction superintendents for companies like Bechtel, Black & Vietch, Shaw/Stone & Webster, Duke/Fluor Daniels, that contract to build and sometimes operate, nuke plants in those "half assed countries." They have continued to build them there because there is little or no environmental movements to say no. They have economic reasons for choosing nuke energy and they have drunk the Kool-Aide. I share your concern about accidents occurring elsewhere, but it does not have to be in a third world country either. That is just bias and ignorance.

I read somewhere and just looked to find it amongst the sea of data out there but didn't locate the figures I read, that Fukushima has several times the amount of fuel rods as described above than were at Chernobyl, and stands to be such a much greater disaster in the case of an uncontrolled chain reaction and/or explosions, that more radioactive substances possibly thrown into our environment (ocean and winds and rain and snow) than any other plant's fuel on earth.

From what I have read about the construction of Fukushima, the engineers took one reactor designed and built with the aid of GE, and then they proceeded to copy that for themselves 4 several times over, saving the money of having GE charge for doing it. Japan was the #2 economy in the world. I just read that no one wants to buy an engine block from Japan anymore. This will eventually devastate Japan's economy, so on any economic scale, the damage resulting from this accident will be much more damaging when all is said and done, which won't be for like 200 years, actually.

The irony of having these 6 reactors located in one cluster is that it was done because anti-nuke environmental activists in Japan would not allow any plants to be built in their areas, hence the economically-challenged and lightly populated area in the north east coast of Japan received this unusual cluster of 6 reactors. Isn't that ironic that the industry shills cannot even use that datum piece to defend their actions. They can't say it was the environmentalists' fault. Well, just think how stupid they would sound saying others wouldn't let us build in their towns because they claimed nuke energy generation from these plants was not worth the risk and we had to clump so many together like we did. What those activists feared and predicted actually happened.


Terrorists? Mkay.

Reactionary and uninformed,

Dude

[bvar22]

71. Love it. You are actually blaming the Environmentalists!!!!

Well Done!

What was PROVED in Fukushima is that
It CAN and WILL happen again.

[robdogbucky]

72. Sorry, I am not blaming environmentalists

This is a fact, and I heard an interview with one of the environmentalists that brought it about. He said he was grateful the plant they fought against was not built in his hometown, but felt awful for the residents of the Fukushima Plant area. This is just a fact that explains how such a large number of reactors were set in one place. Why don't you google it or does it make you feel good to make shit up?

I don't think there is a set anywhere else in the world like this. I am happy to be corrected if you can prove me wrong. Or if you have any facts that contradict what I have represented about how this many reactors were set in one location, please share with us. Very happy to hear from you how this happened?

The same thing happened over there, in the lack of planning for worst case scenario as has happened here in places like San Onofre and Diablo Canyon. This lack of planning here came about with the aid and assistance of the appeals court in DC in the case of Diablo Canyon. Two of the judges on that appeals panel that made the ruling about Diablo Canyon were...wait for it....Antonin Scalia and wait for it.....Ken Starr.

How close do you live to a plant? I am 243 miles from Diablo Canyon, but Lawrence Livermore in Livermore and Livermore Labs on Cal's campus are a mere 15 miles up the road. There are small research reactors all over and there is area radioactive pollution in very many places here in the Bay Area from old nuke sub bases, from weapons stockpiling, etc. Remember back in the 80s when trains with spent nuclear munitions, (Depleted Uranium) and other nuke related items were transported to the Concord Naval Weapons Depot, and there would be news reports of activists dressed in purple for solidarity, that would lie down on the tracks to prevent the trains from coming through their communities on their way to CNWD? That was us, numbnuts. That facility is only 5 miles away from where I now live. Most of that stuff is still buried over there, mostly DU.

Is this all just an internet exercise for you? It is not for me. I am deeply concerned for my future and my grandson's future. I have been following this disaster since the late night I was up and the first news came across the net. The video of the first tsunamis kept me awake most of the night after I retired. Little did I know that night what was in store for us here from something that happened across the Pacifis Ocean from where I am.

I fervently hope the future does not hold nuclear plants. I know we can do better with alternative energy. Especially solar and gas-fired cogeneration plants. The only reason we have any other sources is the greed factor and the stranglehold easy profits has on our economy and planning. Why don't you google uranium and see who owns those deposits worldwide and who profits from its continiued use? Instead of flying off your little reactionary handle there. The sun is a free source of nuclear energy and that is the main reason it is not developed beyond the point it is now. There are heavy hitters that own the uranium deposits, check that out and get back to me, then we can have a good conversation about assigning blame.

I am stating a fact about the Fukushima situation, that was imparted by one of the individuals in Japan interviewed on TV that fought against it. Please find evidence to the contrary and present it here, otherwise please refrain from knee-jerk reactions to simple news. Now the industry can hardly blame environmentalists for this disaster and I was not doing so either, this is a fact and, they have to admit that the disaster that has happened in Fukushima is just what those environmentalists didn't want to have happen in their community. They saved their community and that is a victory for them. Unfortunately, Fukushima did not have the same type of community organization to get this done and the plant was built ther instead. Do you have other information? Please share it if you do.

That the result unleashed the worst nuclear energy tragedy in history speaks volumes about the industry's claims of safety.

This was built back in the 70s and I don't think there was the resistence in the Fukushima area at that time in that area as there was in other areas. I mean the plant was not built in Tokyo, was it?

Sorry you took a fact the wrong way. The environmentalists in Japan and the anti-nuke movement are probably the only reasons this didn't happen in Tokyo. Yet.

Really sorry you had to interpret a fact that way. I honestly think that fact works against the industry, not environmentalists.

I live on the West Coast, I just put my garden in. Do you think any of us out here are going to escape the accumulation of radiation over the period of time Fukushima is likely going to be releasing it? It will really do me no good to eat veggies from my own garden if the air and rain (thank dog it doesn't rain in the summer here) are irradiated. We cannot escape radiation, the government is now and will in the future, deceive us in the name of civil order and nuke industry corporate profits. We will be the last to know of any unrelenting dangers. I am fatalistic about what can be done to protect myself at this point.

I'm glad you found the time to be so reactive this morning. Does my heart good to see shallow analysis like this and for someone to miss the point entirely.

Have a sunny day!

[franzia99]

37. Fukushima would not be hard to duplicate when it comes to disasters

I know that here in America decades worth of spent fuel is just sitting in our nuclear plants unprotected by any containment vessel. Many experts have said the exposed spent fuel is more dangerous than anything in the reactor. People have wanted to haul the spent fuel to store in Nevada but for political reasons it hasn't happened yet. Fukushima could EASILY happen here.

FYI, with Three Mile Island the plant had only been up and running for a very short time so there was no spent fuel to worry about. That's not the case anymore.

[franzia99]

35. haha, 4 reactors have been breached and all the spent fuel has never been protected by a containment

vessel.

[The Backlash Cometh]

20. That's Europe. Where is the USA positioned in this warning?

[robdogbucky]

28. Will this suffice?

From the OP above:

"...Data for the west coast of the United States, which received the Fukushima radioactive fallout 6-10 days before France, reveals that levels of radioactive iodine-131 concentration are 8-10 times higher there, the institute says..."

http://www.euractiv.com/en/health/radiation-risks-fukus...

[Paradoxical]

36. The levels are still really, really low. Too low to pose an actual risk.

[franzia99]

38. People shouldn't give false assurances. Please provide a source.

People are providing good sources suggesting that we should be worried and then others are giving blanket statements saying we're fine, nothing to worry about. If things really are safe then I want to know that. But provide a credible source for what you're saying. People have a right to know the risks and burying our heads in the sand won't help us.

[Paradoxical]

39. The levels measured are dangerous if exposed for a 70 year lifespan...

http://enenews.com/alert-epa-radioactive-iodine-131-levels-in-rainwater-exceed-maximum-contaminant-level-permitted-in-drinking-water

The levels recorded exceed the MCL. Which is based on long-term exposure. Which is based on the average lifespan.

[franzia99]

42. Sigh.

[Paradoxical]

43. Is that seriously your response?

[franzia99]

44. Better question: Is that seriously your post?

[Paradoxical]

45. Yes that is seriously my post. What exactly do you find wrong with it?

[uppityperson]

47. it doesn't prove his point?

:shrug:

[Paradoxical]

48. For a few days I was the same way. Until one of my friends who's a biology major showed me.

The current levels are by no means "non-existent". But they are currently safe. Especially once you take into consideration the very short half life of isotopes like I-131.

We would have to be exposed for years (possibly decades) before these levels had any measurable consequences. And even then it would be difficult to associate.

[liberation]

67. "We would have to be exposed for years (possibly decades) before these levels had any measurable"

I am willing to bet that if I were to offer you a glass with radioactive iodine and water, you would not drink it. A half life of days does not imply that prolonged exposure is required.

Yes elevated levels of particles have not made it Stateside yet. No, prolonged exposure is not required for health issues to emerge.

[robdogbucky]

73. "But they are currently safe."

Until they raise the levels considered dangerous again, which I believe they just did, no? Love how the goalposts just move on down the field, like on rollers.

[uppityperson]

26. NO BRIE!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ok, now they're pissing me off

k&r

[nilram]

66. You Will SIT in the CORNER and you will have AGED CHEDDAR and you Will Be HAPPY. Now Sush!

Hey, at least it's not Gouda!

[franzia99]

29. Thanks for posting this helpful information.

[CoffeeCat]

31. Thank you United States (NOT!!!)

Wow, those Europeans sure are lucky. When they're faced with dangerous levels of
radiation that could kill their citizens or cause cancer---they get an alert.

What do we get in the good ol' US of A? JACKSQUAT!

And, according to this article (salt meet wound)--the levels of radioactive iodine-131 in the United
States are 8-10 times higher here than they are in France.

Motherfers. :mad: :mad:

[truedelphi]

88. Don't you get it - instead of giving us all a pony,

Obama has put up a Magic Shield that deflects radiation from the United States.

Except, of course, from Vermont. But then, those damn Vermonters and their notion of having Single Payer Universal Health Care, be damned!

[CoffeeCat]

32. I just finished reading this article...

...and can I just say--that since this nuclear disaster happened, I have felt like a crazy
person. I would read articles on this disaster and the radiation, and I felt like a goofball
for not understanding the situation, or if we were in danger. After reading US-media based
articles, I would have more questions than answers, and I felt confused.

Those bastards. That was totally by design. We were supposed to be so puzzled that we just
gave up worrying about the radiation and tuned in to American Idol.

I just read the article in the OP, and I felt myself relaxing. This article told the levels of
radioactive iodine-131 that were considered dangerous. Then, the article told us how much
radioactive iodine-131 was in the food that was the focus of the article. Then, the article
explained how much would have to be consumed over a period of days--for a person to ingest a
dangerous amount.

Hallefrickinluia! FACTS!!!! Information that makes sense!!

The problem isn't with any of us who are confused and frustrated. The problem isn't with
people who want to know if the milk is safe to drink or if we should let our kids play out
in the rain or if a spinach salad is harmful.

The problem is with our corporate-owned, piece-of-shit government and media conglomerates who
could give a damn if we live or die. It's just oh so important to protect the nuclear-energy
companies and keep GE happy snappy. I'm so fricking pissed right now, I can barely type.

This article lays it all out and demonstrates that it's not IMPOSSIBLE to inform and help the public.

It's possible all right. OUR COUNTRY JUST CHOOSES TO NOT DO THAT!

The article also demonstrates how HORRIBLE this situation is. The French get a warning in their
country---but the article states that the radioactive iodine levels in the United States are several
times higher than in France.

Does everyone realize the significance of this????????? This is worse than BP, as far as the utter,
sewer-deep selfishness of our government and the corporations. There is NO WARNING here. NO clear,
concise helpful information to calm our fears or answer our questions. We're just told to "move along".

It's NOT FINE! This article from Europe clearly spells it out. We're sitting in a more toxic situation,
but we get NOTHING from our government. Clearly, the authors of this article just kicked the United
States in the shins as it spotlighted our government's insanely cruel and abusive treatment of its
citizens.

This is.....absolutely unbelievable!

[uppityperson]

33. Link in article links to this pdf, translated some via babelfish...

NB: information which appears in this text can concern other European countries. Indeed, the contamination of the air is overall identical in Germany, in Switzerland, in Belgium, in Italy, etc the results which we have for the United States on the other hand reveal appreciably higher levels of contamination (10 times approximately). It is all the more important to avoid the regular consumption of rainwater and not to consume in an excessive way the food at the risk (vegetables with sheets, milk and fresh cheese).

(clip)

These very weak activities do not induce any risk for the people who were under rain without protection. On the other hand, the use of rainwater like primary source of food is disadvised, in particular if the consumers are young children. With to note that the regulation does not regard rainwater as a drinking water. 1 Water coming from underground collectings or large river should not pose problem. It would be necessary on the other hand more closely to examine the situation of the water levels standard lakes collinaires which collect rainwater of one or more areas catchment. FOOD POTENTIALLY HAS RISK There is, a priori, two categories of food to be considered: plants with broad sheets salads type, blettes, spinaches, cabbages, sorrel… (except if they are cultivated under greenhouse obviously); milk and them fresh cheeses (in particular of goat and ewe), meat safe for the herds still in stalling. The risks are certainly very weak but if one takes account of the possible duration of contamination, of the existence of particular dietary habits and the vulnerability of some groups of populations, one is not any more in the field of the negligible risk and it seems useful to avoid behaviors at the risk: to prevent that the sensitive food constitutes, on next weeks the base of the food of the family. This measurement of good sense concerns particularly children, expectant mothers and the moms who nurse.

(clip)
" the risk related to the food or water ingestion contaminated by the radioactive fallout should remain limited. The laboratory of the CRIIRAD will evaluate as soon as possible the quantities of radioactivity deposited on the ground (dry deposits and deposits related to precipitations) in order to check the orders of magnitude awaited in food and to give, if necessary, of the adapted councils ".

(clip)
Many people asked to us whether they could continue to consume the water of their cistern (water collected on the roof of their dwelling). Taking into account the levels of contamination measured until now, the specific consumption of some water glasses does not pose problem. On the other hand, if water collected must be used as primary source of food over 15 days or 3 weeks, the received amount could reach, to even exceed the threshold from which the risk is not regarded any more as negligible, in particular if the consumers are young children. They are very low levels of risk but which it is to better avoid 8 Let us recall in addition that the ministry for health does not consider rainwater. as a drinking water and warns against the risks associated with its consumption. If you cannot avoid using the water collected on your roof for the watering of your vegetable garden, take care to sprinkle the ground and not the sheets of vegetables: absorption is important and fast on the level of the leaf aeras; slower and much less effective starting from the system racinaire of the plants.
(clip)FOOD POTENTIALLY HAS RISK For a few days, the questions of our correspondents have related more particularly to the impact radioactive fallout on the food chain: is the food contaminated? So yes which? Does one have to avoid consuming them? Is this dangerous for the children? For an expectant mother? For a mom who nurses her child? There are two categories of food at the risk: those which are contaminated by direct deposit and those which are contaminated by transfer (milk and meat) • The importance of the contamination depends, of course of the activity deposited (by ways dry and wet) but also of the vegetative stage of the plant and surfaces of collecting available: plants with broad sheets salads type, blettes, spinaches, cabbages, sorrel… belong to the most exposed food (except if they are cultivated under greenhouse obviously). Taking into account the level of contamination of the air, coefficients of transfer of the air on the ground and the rain and of the air and the rain to the plants, the activity in iodize 131 of these plants should reach a few becquerels per kilogramme, even some tens of Bq/kg. Let us specify that the radioactive particles deposited on the leaf aeras are quickly metabolized by the plant (phenomenon of translocation) and the fact of washing the plant is not effective. Certain culinary techniques make it possible on the other hand to eliminate part of the radioactivity. • Milk and the fresh cheeses and the meat coming from herds still in stalling do not pose obviously not problem. In addition, certain herds are currently led in pastures but the essence of their food is still brought by fodder or grains. In this case, the incidence of the contaminated grass ingestion remains limited. The animals in pasturage can brouter the grass on wide surfaces and to thus introduce the radioactive products collected by cover plant. Part of the contamination is rapidemenorganes, according to the metabolic characteristics of each radionuclide. Radioactive iodine concentrate in thyroid animal but it also is fixed by the glands mammaires and is transferred with milk. One also finds it in the meat but in less concentration. • The factor of transfer of grass to milk strongly according to whether it is a question varies milk or cow's milk of goat or of ewe whose contamination can be higher of an order of magnitude than that of milk of cow. The radioactivity of cheeses depends on their manufacturing process and of the times of affinage.t eliminated but a part is fixed in theirs

Do I have to pay attention to my food? The answer to this question is an individual choice. The risks are certainly very weak but if one takes account of the possible duration of the contamination, the existence of particular dietary habits and the vulnerability of certain groups of populations (children, expectant mothers or nursing), one is not any more in the field of the negligible risk and it seems useful to avoid behaviors at the risk.

(clip)

The infants (0 - 2 years) are most vulnerable: the ingestion of about fifty becquerels of iodine 131 is enough to deliver at their organization an amount of 10 µSv. If the food at the risk (vegetables with sheet, milks and fresh cheeses…) contain about 1 to 10 Bq/kg, even more, it is completely possible to imagine that in 2 or 3 weeks the threshold of reference of 10 µSv/an can be exceeded. It is however easy to limit the exposures to negligible levels by taking care that these food does not constitute, throughout April, the base of the food of the family. 0n can thus prefer milk “long conservation” with fresh milk, not make excess with fresh cheeses of ewe, the blettes, salads or spinaches. These measurements of good sense particularly concern the children, the expectant mothers and the moms who nurse. NB: the value taken in reference by the CRIIRAD is the threshold of the risk “known as “negligible” is 10 µSv/an (or 0,01 mSv/an). It should not be confused with the limit of maximum amount acceptable of 1 mSv/an which is 100 times higher. Even by imagining a food centered on the food which concentrates radioactivity, the levels of exposure in France should remain definitely lower than this value. For the inhabitants of the west coast of the United States, the situation is appreciably different.

(clip)
The west coast of the United States receives 6 to 10 days before France the impact of the radioactive rejections of the power station of FUKUSHIMA DAIICHI. Within sight of the results available, one can expect, in any case over the next week, with activities in light but regular fall.

[right2bfree]

40. Lucked up and found a cheap bottle of Potassium Iodide. Take one pill every day. Dont wait until its

too3late.

[Paradoxical]

41. Terrible advice. Taking potassium iodide can cause damage.

It should only be taken if absolutely necessary.

[right2bfree]

55. I am fine. My thyroid was always a bit on the low side anyhow. So far, no problems. nt

[Paradoxical]

56. "So far, no problems" - uhhh yeah you go ahead and believe that.

But keep your nonsense to yourself. You're putting other people's health at risk by telling them to do things they shouldn't.

[right2bfree]

58. I am not telling anyone to do anything. The information is there. Use it as you will. nt

[uppityperson]

59. "Dont wait until its too3late" ? Take KI too long and lose your thyroid!

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing.

[uppityperson]

57. If your thyroid is low, you can induce severe hypothyroidism if taken too long. link here...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42135438/ns/health-health_care

As demand spikes for potassium iodide in the wake of Japan’s nuclear crisis, U.S. poison control centers are starting to receive reports of illness in people who’ve ingested the drug aimed at protecting against radiation sickness.

At least seven people have reported reactions to the drug, often called by its chemical name, KI, including two who said they were suffering from serious symptoms including vomiting, racing heart and dizziness or vertigo.

That’s according to Jessica Wehrman, a spokeswoman for the American Association of Poison Control Centers, which tracks reports from 57 poison control centers nationwide.
(clip)
He warned that the drug could cause serious reactions in some people and even backfire in the case of an actual emergency, putting people past a two-week window of safe dosage. After that period of time, the drug can induce severe hypothyroidism, a condition that essentially shuts down thyroid function.

[uppityperson]

46. That is really bad advice. Here is some info on why...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42135438/ns/health-health_care/

As demand spikes for potassium iodide in the wake of Japan’s nuclear crisis, U.S. poison control centers are starting to receive reports of illness in people who’ve ingested the drug aimed at protecting against radiation sickness.

At least seven people have reported reactions to the drug, often called by its chemical name, KI, including two who said they were suffering from serious symptoms including vomiting, racing heart and dizziness or vertigo.

That’s according to Jessica Wehrman, a spokeswoman for the American Association of Poison Control Centers, which tracks reports from 57 poison control centers nationwide.
(clip)
He warned that the drug could cause serious reactions in some people and even backfire in the case of an actual emergency, putting people past a two-week window of safe dosage. After that period of time, the drug can induce severe hypothyroidism, a condition that essentially shuts down thyroid function. “It is inappropriate, foolhardy and dangerous to be taking iodine supplements at this time,” Wartofsky said. “It’s very important to hold off until it’s absolutely necessary.”...(more)

http://emergency.cdc.gov/radiation/ki.asp

How often should I take KI?
A single dose of KI protects the thyroid gland for 24 hours. A one-time dose at the levels recommended in this fact sheet is usually all that is needed to protect the thyroid gland. In some cases, radioactive iodine might be in the environment for more than 24 hours. If that happens, local emergency management or public health officials may tell you to take one dose of KI every 24 hours for a few days. You should do this only on the advice of emergency management officials, public health officials, or your doctor. Avoid repeat dosing with KI for pregnant and breastfeeding women and newborn infants. Those individuals may need to be evacuated until levels of radioactive iodine in the environment fall.

Taking a higher dose of KI, or taking KI more often than recommended, does not offer more protection and can cause severe illness or death.

[hayu_lol]

49. You might want to pick up canned spinach, saurkraut, and the like...

just for a backup supply. This stuff was grown before the problem, canned or bottled before the problem, and there is a plentiful supply for the present. These items have been stored inside right to the point of sale and then in storage in your home.

Powdered milk is the same. There are many products like these that have not and will not have full exposure to whatever comes.

[right2bfree]

54. Thanks! Good advice is worth its weight in gold. No problems with the PI so far. nt

[uppityperson]

60. psst, it is "KI" not PI, unless you are talking private investigator. Potassium is K.

[right2bfree]

61. Is Porassium a new element? nt

[uppityperson]

62. No, thank you for pointing out the T is by R on my keyboard. PoTassium is K, not P

in case you want to be able to post it right.

You have no comment on the problem of taking KI for longer than 2 weeks and harming your thyroid? Only snark towards a typo, nothing about health issues related to taking KI like you are?

[stranger81]

85. Except that you'll have to make the powdered milk with radioactive drinking water.

I threw out all our fresh milk & dairy products yesterday and replaced them with UHT products packaged before this calamity. My daughter probably won't like them as much, but I'd really like to see her make it through high school without spending time inside an oncology ward.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

65. You're killing your thyroid! stop taking them right now.

[Warren DeMontague]

50. Someone will be along soon to scold you and tell you that gerbils and bananas are more dangerous.

Shit, can you imagine a gerbil armed with a banana? That's more dangerous than 20 reactors melting down! Fuck!

:sarcasm:

[uppityperson]

51. A gerbil armed with a banana pouring cement! oooooooooo

I missed the origin of the banana comment, what was that all about?

[Warren DeMontague]

52. Any time anyone starts talking about radiation, the helpful nuclear industry defense league

shows up to remind people that BANANAS ARE RADIOACTIVE, too!

It's silly.

[uppityperson]

53. Are peaches also, or is it just something associated with bananas? How about zucchinis?

maybe something to do with fruit, or long phallic shaped produce?

[Warren DeMontague]

79. I think it's the potassium in bananas, which is mildly radioactive. nt

[uppityperson]

82. Thank you. List of K content of some fruits/veggies

Value in mg per 100 grams of edible portion of raw item


Potassium

French Beans 1316
Lentils 905
Spinach 558
Banana 358
Carrots 320
Broccoli 316
Cauliflower 303
Strawberry 292
Papaya 257
G.Peas 244
Tomatoes 237
Melon 228
Asparagus 202
Lettuce 194
Grapes 191
Peach 190
Orange 169
Pineapple 125
Pear 119
Apples

Graph form, compared with similar weights

[JSK]

63. Don't scoff at the souce of this link

This is good information:

http://www.suzannesomers.com/Blog/post/Radiation-Exposure-What-you-can-do-to-Protect-yourself.aspx

[_ed_]

68. After this latest episode in nuclear power follies,

I've decided to completely ignore and marginalize anyone who advocates for nuclear power. I'm treating them like they are birthers now.

[robdogbucky]

74. Have felt that way

for what, 40-odd years now. Welcome to the party. What took you so long?

[davidthegnome]

70. I'm confused...

Did anyone honestly consider the radiation risks altogether negligible? Really? Wow.

[robdogbucky]

75. What, you don't have a TV? a radio? You have been gone somewhere?

Like on the moon?

Media has been falling all over itself with reassurances. Google "reassurances and Fukushima" one time.

[davidthegnome]

78. Honestly

I asked if anyone - honestly - considered the risks negligible.

[robdogbucky]

81. The drumbeat message from the media has been thus, regardless:

I have read a lot of DU posters that have shilled for the industry and with no factual backup have claimed that the radiation risks are negligible. You have read those posts, no? They are merely mimicking the message from the industry and governments to give reassurances when they don't really have any clue as to how dangerous this disaster will eventually prove to be. Remember the people that drove Nadinbrzinski off the board? Those people, and I cannot "call them out," but they have considered the risks negligible. So did these news items:

ABC disseminated the Japanese government’s reassurances, such as they were, on March 14:

Several hours after the explosion and fire, elevated levels of radiation were detected in Tokyo, 175 miles away, though government officials said there was no health risk there…

…"There is no longer chain reaction of nuclear material," said IAEA director general Yukiya Amano, according to The Associated Press. "Reactor vessels and primary containment vessels ... stay intact. The release of radioactivity is limited."

http://abcnews.go.com/International/japan-earthquake-radiation-leaking-fukushima-nuclear-plant-explodes/story?id=13131123


On March 16, Science News Magazine gave this reassurance:

Fukushima Radiation Update
by Dennis Normile on 16 March 2011

TOKYO—At a press briefing today Keiichi Nakagawa, a radiologist at University of Tokyo Hospital, predicted that the radiation emanating from the damaged Fukushima nuclear power plant will have a negligible effect on public health. But those working to contain the radiation leaks and quench the fires face an increased risk of cancer, particularly since the government raised the allowable exposure limit yesterday.

Nakagawa said that normally nuclear power plant workers in Japan are limited to accumulated radiation doses of 100 millisieverts. But as an emergency measure, the ministry of health on Tuesday raised that to an accumulated 250 millisieverts. Nakagawa says that at that higher level of exposure, the workers will likely face a 1% or more increased risk of cancer. "It's only a risk, but they are now carrying a heavier risk of cancer," he said.

Radiation levels of 400 millisieverts per hour were recorded within the site on Tuesday. But workers are wearing protective clothing, working in brief shifts and being occasionally pulled off the site to limit accumulated exposure.
Nakagawa explained that the situation in the local community is significantly different…

http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/



On March 18, the WSJ gave this reassurance:

MARCH 18, 2011, 9:05 A.M. ET

UPDATE: Tokyo Radiation Tad Higher Than Normal, Still Negligible
By Hiroyuki Kachi
OF DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

TOKYO (Dow Jones)--Radiation levels in the Tokyo area were around typical background levels on Friday afternoon, while in areas close to the quake-damaged Fukushima nuclear power plant they remained high but still below levels that would pose a threat to human health, officials said.

The Tokyo Metropolitan Government said Friday on its website that radiation levels in downtown Tokyo stood at 0.047 microsievert an hour around 1000 GMT. That compares with the 0.035 microsievert an hour a person would typically be exposed to in Shinjuku district of downtown Tokyo due to background radiation.

Levels remained higher in Fukushima Prefecture, closer to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, which has become a matter of international concern after a massive earthquake on March 11 knocked out the cooling systems of several of the reactors there. Authorities Friday continued to pour water onto the troubled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear-power complex using fire trucks.

Japanese authorities were evacuating people within a 20-kilometer radius and telling those within an 30-kilometer radius of the complex to stay inside…

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20110318-706457.html



Forbes’ Mathew Herper gave these reassurances on March 20:

Fear Of Japan’s Radiation Is Overdone
Mar. 20 2011 - 9:37 am

How dangerous is the radiation emerging from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant Japan? From a public health perspective, less risky than you might expect, experts say. Other problems — like lack of medical care, shelter, and water — could pose a more immediate threat to human life and health.

“For the population of Japan, there are a lot of other issues that are going to determine life and death in the short term,” says Kenneth W. Kizer, director of the Institute for Population Health Improvement at UC-Davis and a former director of California’s Department of Health.

“While yes, we have to think about the radiation and do everything we can in that regard, which frankly isn’t very much from a medical perspective, the real issue is food and water and basic hygiene and basic health care. ”

You’d be forgiven for thinking the toll on human life and health from the reactor could be immense. Up-to-the minute news reports give the impression that the situation could worsen any minute and is exceedingly dangerous. Workers trying to control the situation at the plant certainly are in danger. The news that radioactive elements are present in small amounts in some food seems ominous. But while these are warning signs, it is not clear that the harm in absolute numbers will be great even if the worst should happen and significant amounts of radioactive waste are spewed into the air or the ground.

http://blogs.forbes.com/matthewherper/2011/03/20/fear-of-japans-radiation-is-overdone/


Also on March 20, this reassurance was published by http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2011/03/fukushima_crisis_latest_maps_o_2.html:

Fukushima Crisis update: Latest maps of spread of radiation plumes in Asia-Pacific - March 20, 2011

Austria's weather service, the Central Institute for Meteorology and Geodynamics in Vienna, has posted an update today of its dispersion modelling of radiation from the troubled Fukushima nuclear power. The plume, having been blown West to the ocean yesterday, has turned inwards to the mainland today Sunday, as it will tomorrow and Tuesday, while transport across the ocean is stopping. Rain and snow will wash out radioactivity to the ground.

The centre explains the colour coding used in it's maps as: "The colour scale shows a total of 5 colours. The area marked "E" shows an area with estimated current equivalent dose rate of 10 mSv/h (in a 25x25 km2 square). The violet colour on the outer edge of contaminated areas (Area A) represents 0,3 μSv/h, which corresponds to the amount of the natural background radiation dose..."

…It also provides other fresh data from the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO) (see the long article I published last week on CTBTO data for more details on its data).

It says radiation levels at the Takasaki station in Japan fell after peaking midweek, due to atmospheric transport condition. Iodine-131 levels at Milli-Bq/m3 at the Petropavlovsk station in Russia on 15/16 March. Unreviewed data suggest similar levels at the CTBT station in Sacramento, California on 17 March. Radiation in both Russia and California was four orders of magnitude lower than in the Takasak station in Japan, it says, adding that "there is no health risk whatsoever."

http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2011/03/fukushima_crisis_latest_maps_o_2.html


And on March 30, good ol’ ABC News gave this reassurance:

Fukushima radiation traces spread across Asia
By North Asia correspondent Mark Willacy
Posted Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:20am AEDT

Governments in Asia are urging their citizens to stay calm after small traces of radioactivity from Japan's crippled nuclear plant were detected across the region…

…Traces have even drifted all the way to the United States, with rainwater in Ohio found to have been contaminated.

But each government says the levels are so miniscule the radiation presents no risk to human health. The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) says there is no need to test passengers from Japan for radiation.

The agency says the risk of contamination is negligible.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/03/30/3177379.htm



Who can you trust?

[Generic Other]

80. And where is MY government?

Sniffing around women's vaginas. I am so mad I am blowing smoke out my ears!

:mad:

[nc4bo]

86. Sniffing veejay-jays AND trying to up the EPA radiation exposure limits :S

If any one thinks that any government in most "civilized" countries (as they stand now) has their best interests at heart, is in for a huge surprise.

[Warren DeMontague]

87. That is NOT fair. That is NOT all our government is doing.

Our government is very busy right now, making sure cancer ridden chemo grannies don't have access to pot for their nausea.

[BobbyBoring]

90. I remember how sick I felt after the Valdez episode

And then the BP episode and now this? WHAT THE FUCK!

Every clean up worker from the Valdez spill is DEAD. We'll never know how many have died or are in the process of dying from the BP "Accident". In the course of a year, we have destroyed the Gulf and the end result of the Fukushima disaster is impossible to imagine.

The common denominator in all these "Accidents" is greed. We should have been pursuing alternative energy sources since the 70s when we were waiting in lines for gas. Had we started then, we wouldn't even think of nucular, but NO!

Man is one destructive animal! Self destructive!