[ RadSafe ] RadSafe Digest, Vol 2207, Issue 1

[Mark Miller]

More shameful fear mongering and misinformation.

Try :
https://www.facebook.com/radiationeffects.org/

or http://radiationeffects.org/

for a change........check out all the bookmarks on the left side of the
website page.
Mark


On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 11:00 AM, <radsafe-request at health.phys.iit.edu>
wrote:

> Send RadSafe mailing list submissions to
>         radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://health.phys.iit.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/radsafe
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         radsafe-request at health.phys.iit.edu
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         radsafe-owner at health.phys.iit.edu
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of RadSafe digest..."
>
>
> Important!
>
> To keep threads/discussions more easily readable PLEASE observe the
> following guideline when replying to a message or digest:
>
> 1. When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of radsafe digest ..."
> 2. Do NOT include the entire digest in your reply. Include ONLY the
> germane sentences to which you're responding.
>
> Thanks!_______________________________________________
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: " Seaborne Fukushima Radiation Plume Hits West Coast -
>       How the Media Reported it Dangerously Wrong " (Jason Meade)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 14:18:24 -0500
> From: Jason Meade <meadeja at vcu.edu>
> To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing
>         List"   <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] " Seaborne Fukushima Radiation Plume Hits
>         West Coast - How the Media Reported it Dangerously Wrong "
> Message-ID:
>         <CABSuMJekqDGY+RURMWz-05xeQZZ2uN2w_nUA0ih4ctong3wnhQ at mail.gmail.
> com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> "And it takes what, 70 CURIES of ingested Cs-134 to reach a TEDE of 5 rem?"
>
> Quick (embarrassing) correction: that should read "70 *micro-CURIES*"
> instead of Curies.
>
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 8:58 AM, Jason Meade <meadeja at vcu.edu> wrote:
>
> > "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
> >> <https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=
> web&cd=8&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwje9NKv6JLRAhUMwmMKHZt0D
> ZkQFghNMAc&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.intech>
> >> open.com%2Fpdfs%2F32098.pdf&usg=AFQjCNF8M_G69_GJ8h-6xKkCD581
> >> wegogw&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/rad
> >> saferules.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 <(804)%20828-0594> office
> > 330-347-0271 <(330)%20347-0271> cell
> >
> > A society grows great
> > when old men plant trees
> > whose shade they know
> > they shall never sit in.
> >
>
>
>
> --
> 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.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> RadSafe mailing list
> RadSafe at health.phys.iit.edu
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/radsafe
>
>
> End of RadSafe Digest, Vol 2207, Issue 1
> ****************************************
>