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

Wed Jan 4 07:58:40 CST 2017

"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."

Japan lowered their food limits after public fear and public perception
pressure in the aftermath of the Fukushima accident.  To lower than the
cesium levels found in some foods BEFORE the actual event (especially in
mushrooms).

And the plume of Cs-134 contains at most a Bq/m^3 of seawater actually on
the west coast.  Even the higher concentrations far out in the ocean
heading our direction don't bump above 5 Bq/m^3 in samples taken (around
1/3 of the activity of the naturally occurring K-40 in an average banana).
And it takes what, 70 CURIES of ingested Cs-134 to reach a TEDE of 5 rem?
Play with the maths to see exactly how absurd the teensy tiny numbers are
for these folks trying to terrify the public about the radioactive west
coast beaches and exactly why they are using SI units instead of Ci, and
why they don't bother breaking out the actual epistemology or epidemiology
numbers into play and work out the actual potential rise in cancer risks to
the population for the current demonstrable increase in contamination (back
to the hypothetical any radiation exposure no matter how slight is (maybe)
lethal nonsense pumped into the public sphere that causes stampedes and
panics).

And the overstatement of bio-accumulation is also quite alarmist, presented
in a way to provide just enough "truthiness" to make it seem "true."  While
it is true that it is absorbed readily into the bloodstream, it also leaves
the body comparatively quickly.

On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Jaro Franta <jaro_10kbq at videotron.ca>
wrote:

> That's an excellent text.  Thank you !
>
> Unfortunately no mention of John Gofman.
>
>
>  Jaro
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Otto Raabe
> Sent: Monday, December 26, 2016 4:42 PM
> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] " Seaborne Fukushima Radiation Plume Hits West
> Coast - How the Media Reported it Dangerously Wrong "
>
>
>       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&uac
> t=8&ved=0ahUKEwje9NKv6JLRAhUMwmMKHZt0DZkQFghNMAc&url=http%3A%2F%
> 2Fcdn.intech
> open.com%2Fpdfs%2F32098.pdf&usg=AFQjCNF8M_G69_GJ8h-
> 6xKkCD581wegogw&sig2=8woQ
> 3YiUJj_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-dangero
> > usly-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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>

-- 
Thanks,
Jason A Meade, AS, BS, MHSA, RRPT, RT(T)
Senior Radiation Safety Specialist
Virginia Commonwealth University

Sanger Hall, B2-016
1101 East Marshall St
PO Box 980112
Richmond, VA 23298-0112

meadeja at vcu.edu
804-828-0594 office
330-347-0271 cell

A society grows great
when old men plant trees
whose shade they know
they shall never sit in.