[ RadSafe ] " Seaborne Fukushima Radiation Plume Hits West Coast - How the Media Reported it Dangerously Wrong "

[Otto Raabe]

      The old Gofman ideas about radiation risk qre completely wrong!
      See my online book chapter.


      Ionizing Radiation Carcinogenesis - InTech
      <https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=8&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwje9NKv6JLRAhUMwmMKHZt0DZkQFghNMAc&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.intechopen.com%2Fpdfs%2F32098.pdf&usg=AFQjCNF8M_G69_GJ8h-6xKkCD581wegogw&sig2=8woQ3YiUJj_l_y11vTRQPA>


**************************************

On 12/26/2016 12:30 PM, Jaro Franta wrote:
> John Gofman cited in " How the Media Reported it Dangerously Wrong "
>
> " According to Gofman's obituary in the L.A. Times, "Gofman and his
> colleague at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Arthur R. Tamplin,
> developed data in 1969 showing that the risk from low doses of radiation was
> 20 times higher than stated by the government.
> Their publication of the data, despite strong efforts to censor it, led them
> to lose virtually all of their research funding and, eventually, their
> positions at the government laboratory."
> Their conclusions were for the most part, later validated."
>
> "Consuming food containing radionuclides is particularly dangerous. If an
> individual ingests or inhales a radioactive particle, it continues to
> irradiate the body as long as it remains radioactive and stays in the body,"
> said Dr. Alan Lockwood, MD in an article on Fox News Health.
>
>
> Jaro
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>
> http://www.environews.tv/121716-no-safe-level-period-media-got-dangerously-w
> rong-fukushima-radiation-hitting-west-coast/
> Seaborne Fukushima Radiation Plume Hits West Coast - How the Media Reported
> it Dangerously Wrong
>
> bureau EnviroNews DC News Bureau
> by Shad Engkilterra
> on December 17, 2016
>
> (EnviroNews DC News Bureau) - "It is not a question any more: radiation
> produces cancer, and the evidence is good all the way down to the lowest
> doses," says the late Dr. John Gofman, Professor Emeritus at the University
> of California, Berkley, in his book Nuclear Witnesses: Insiders Speak Out.
>
> On December 12, 2016, EnviroNews USA's own Editor-in-Chief Emerson Urry
> touched off a firestorm with his news article titled, "It's Finally Here:
> Radioactive Plume From Fukushima Makes Landfall on America's West Coast,"
> which claimed "medical science and epidemiological studies have demonstrated
> time and again that there is no safe amount of radiation for a living
> organism to be subjected to - period."
>
> In his piece, Urry also exposed other news agencies like NBC, the New York
> Post, USA Today and The Inquisitr, catching them with their pants down, in
> the act of repeating the false assertions of the U.S. and Canadian
> researchers, telling people not to worry about the recently detected low
> amounts of cesium 134 found in salmon, and that the levels were within
> "safe" or "accepted" thresholds for human health.
> [EDITOR'S NOTE: Emerson Urry recused himself from all editorial duties on
> this news story.]
>
> Thom Hartmann picked up the article by Urry and read it on his show.
> Then Hartmann offered up his own journalistic explanation on how radiation
> works, and addressed the problem with the proclamation that there is a
> "safe" level of radiation to consume or be exposed to.
> "As the element is decaying it is throwing off radiation, and the radiation,
> if it hits the DNA in the nucleolus and the nucleus of a cell, can alter
> that DNA in ways that can produce things like cancer," Hartmann said.
> "Now it can also cause simply the cell to die or it can mutate the cell in
> all kinds of other weird ways, and so it's kind of a numbers game.
> If you irradiate a million cells. you might get two or three that become
> cancerous.
> That's all it takes, right? You've got cancer," Hartmann continued in his
> video report.
> "The cesium could cause no cancer, or it could cause cancer in the first
> cell it irradiates.
> To say that there is a safe level of radiation is frankly wrong. It's just
> wrong."
>
> VIDEO: THOM HARTMANN REPORTS ON ENVIRONEWS OREGON'S ARTICLE ON FUKUSHIMA
> PLUME HITTING AMERICA'S WEST COAST
>
> There's No Such Thing As A Safe Level of Radiation!
>
> Urry said later in a statement, "It's one thing for the media to regurgitate
> trivial facts on trivial matters,
> but to blindly repeat that consuming low levels of radiation is 'safe,' is
> irresponsible reporting and borders on dangerous.
>
> News editors should take care to do their due diligence on a matter as
> serious as leading readers to believe consuming any amount of radiation is
> 'safe' when medical science and
> epidemiology, dating back 50 years to the present, have demonstrated
> repeatedly that that's just not true.
> Even the smallest exposures increase the risk of cancer to the subject."
>
> According to the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry's (ATSDR)
> report titled, "Public Health Statement for Cesium" from 2004, "stable and
> radioactive cesium can enter your body from the food you eat or the water
> you drink, from the air you breathe, or from contact with your skin.
> When you eat, drink, breathe, or touch things containing cesium compounds
> that can easily be dissolved in water, cesium enters your blood and is
> carried to all parts of your body. No known taste or odor is associated with
> cesium compounds."
>
> Cesium is similar enough to potassium that it can fool the body.
> This results in its bioaccumulation.
> When cesium enters the biological system of a fish, which is then eaten by a
> larger fish, the larger fish becomes contaminated.
> As the larger fish eats more, it becomes more contaminated.
> The cesium accumulates in its body.
> When a person eats that fish, he or she also ingests the cesium that hasn't
> decayed or been excreted.
>
> The more seafood that person eats, the more radioactive material he or she
> will be exposed to.
> The researchers who discovered the cesium recently also made the mistake of
> equating the dangers of consuming seaborne isotopes to that of receiving an
> x-ray, missing the point entirely that ingested or inhaled "internal
> particle emitters" are known to be especially hazardous.
>
> "Consuming food containing radionuclides is particularly dangerous. If an
> individual ingests or inhales a radioactive particle, it continues to
> irradiate the body as long as it remains radioactive and stays in the body,"
> said Dr. Alan Lockwood, MD in an article on Fox News Health.
>
> "Children are much more susceptible to the effects of radiation and stand a
> much greater chance of
> developing cancer than adults," said Andrew Kanter, MD, President of the
> Board for Physicians for Social
> Responsibility (PSR) in that same Fox News Health article. "So it is
> particularly dangerous when they consume radioactive food or water."
>
> Those who might expect the government to protect them from contamination by
> radiation have only to look at the downwinder situation in Utah or the
> consequences of Gofman's research in the late 1960s.
>
> According to Gofman's obituary in the L.A. Times, "Gofman and his colleague
> at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Arthur R. Tamplin, developed data
> in 1969 showing that the risk from low doses of radiation was 20 times
> higher than stated by the government.
> Their publication of the data, despite strong efforts to censor it, led them
> to lose virtually all of their research funding and, eventually, their
> positions at the government laboratory."
> Their conclusions were for the most part, later validated.
> "There is no safe level of radionuclide exposure, whether from food, water
> or other sources, period," said Jeff Patterson, DO, immediate past President
> of PSR, in late March of 2011 in the immediate aftermath of the meltdowns.
> "Exposure to radionuclides, such as iodine 131 and cesium 137, increases the
> incidence of cancer. For this reason, every effort must be taken to minimize
> the radionuclide content in food and water."
>
> "There is no safe dose of radiation," says Prof. Edward P. Radford,
> Physician and Epidemiologist as quoted by GreenMedInfo.
>
> In an email to EnviroNews, nuclear expert Arnie Gundersen said Japan had
> raised the maximum allowable exposure by 20 times the previous number for
> civilians to be able to return to their homes.
>
> The U.S. and the EPA have considered such plans in the case of a nuclear
> accident.
> In food, the U.S. has an allowable dosage of radiation that is 12 times what
> Japan allows.
> "Corporations get the benefit, civilians take the risk," Gundersen wrote.
>
> While Urry and Hartmann have sounded the alarm, there remain unanswered
> questions that desperately need to be resolved.
> Who will clean up the contamination in the food chain?
> How much radiation exposure will governments continue to say is safe in
> spite of the medical research?
> How can people trust what's on their plate and in their corporate owned
> media?
>
>
>
>
> .
>
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu

-- 
Prof. Otto G. Raabe, Ph.D.
Center for Health and the Environment
University of California
Davis, CA 95616
Office: 530-752-7754
Cell:   530-848-3609