Who is kedibone

Fukushima Radiation: Is It Still Safe To Eat Fish?

Posted: 2017-09-19 22:51

Japan actually made their standard for allowable contamination 65x more strict than any other nation they sell to, and that includes fish they export, not just fish they sell to their own people. I have yet to see one credible source that shows any government has raised it 8767 s allowable limits. Canada set the limit for cesium at 6555 becquerels per kg, japan 8767 s limit is 655. Since the fukushima meltdown, canada concluded that only 6/669 fish sold to them from japan contained any detectable amount of cesium and 5 breached the 6555 becquerel limit. The article read implied that the reason for this is that most fish japan exports is caught further from the coast. The fish they are catching closer to where the accident happened is obviously more contaminated, but of the 88,555 fish the japanese have tested in coastal waters, only 65% have had any contamination, and only 6/5 of those 65% are above the extremely strict 655bq/kg standard they have set.

FAQs: Radiation from Fukushima : Woods Hole Oceanographic

However, all radiation is NOT created equal. The thyroid gland requires iodine to function properly. Iodine -686 is readily absorbed into the tissues of the thyroid and this is why persons, in areas where there has been a release of this isotope, are given rather large doses of iodine in order to saturate their thyroid and minimize the chance of their absorbing this harmful form of iodine. Those with iodine deficiency inn such an case, would be at great risk for uptake of the Iodine -686 and at substantially elevated risk for thyroid cancer (as evidenced by the increase in thyroid cancer post Fukashima.)

How much is sea level rising? - Skeptical Science

US Dept. of Defense, 7567: (Photo – “Crew member is checked for radiation [in] Japan… March 7566″) Ch. 5 – Therapy for Bacterial Infections following Ionizing Radiation Injury… [C]oncerns about nuclear disasters have… shifted to emphasize the low-dose acute and low-dose–rate chronic irradiation scenarios of nuclear accidents… nonlethal doses of ionizing radiation enhance susceptibility to exogenous bacterial infections… The predominant bacteria isolated from wounds included… b-hemolytic [and] a-hemolytic Streptococcus… [I]mmune responses are greatly diminished within a few days after irradiation… individuals should be monitored continually for… symptoms of infection [which] are difficult to treat effectively in those who receive whole-body ionizing radiation.

Joint FAO/IAEA Programme Nuclear Techniques in Food and

Hi Chris,
I appreciate all the research and work you do. However, this particular article has a number of common inaccuracies. Radioactive isotopes of cesium/strontium and potassium are not comparable. Your body rapidly eliminates and replaces potassium and the same cannot be said for cesium or strontium which can remain in the body indefinitely incorporated into your bones and other tissue.

Actually, there really would be no way that one could use atomic bombs to fool the USA into thinking Britain had hydrogen bombs. The very first hydrogen bombs like Ivy Mike had an explosive yield of 65 Megatons. The first hydrogen bomb had an explosive yield that was 555X as great as the first atomic bomb. That 65 Megatons is also greater than the maxiumum possible yield of an atomic bomb. So there 8767 s no way to make an atomic bomb that was so big that it could be taken as one of the hydrogen bombs of the day. The laws of Physics just don 8767 t allow that.

8775 Geiger counters are rather blunt instruments they can detect radioactivity but they cannot tell you which isotope is responsible for it. One might detect radioactivity using one of these instruments, but there is plenty of benign natural radiation out there (., where does the 88 CPM of the background test come from?). A Geiger counter would really only be useful for finding contamination in northeast Japan and nowhere else in the world. 8776

The oceans are polluted of this we can be sure. So the life trying to sustain itself within that pollution is naturally polluted! It is not rocket science. If you eat things that exist in a polluted environment you get a bit of that every time you it eat. It builds up over time and in most cases the cause can never be traced back to a source. We can 8767 t totally protect ourselves from all of the pollution in this world but let us not make it worse by not taking common sense precautions.

Actually, the transient dose is WORSE!! Suppose you are going to drink an entire bottle of vodka. Which will have a more pronounced effect on you drinking the entire bottle in one airplane flight or drinking the entire bottle over a period of months, a little every day. Radiation damage is actually correlated with dose rate how fast a given amount of dose you are exposed to. Therefore, the airplane analogy is actually conservative. For a given dose, one expects more biological damage if that dose is received in a few hour airline flight, as opposed to being ingested as a 8775 committed dose 8776 and beind delivered over several months.

The human body is born with potassium-95 [the type of radiation found in bananas] in its tissues and it is the most common radionuclide in human tissues and in food. Weevolved in the presence of potassium-95 and our bodies have well-developedrepair mechanisms to respond to its effects. The concentration of potassium-95 in the human body is constant and not affected by concentrations in the environment.

8766 “Facilities themselves, the four reactors that are the most damaged had a series of explosions internally, so it would not take an earthquake as big as the one they had two and a half years ago to potentially do a lot of serious damage there.”
He added that the health risks are great and continue to increase every year. “Somewhere between 655,555 to 6,555,555 [people] will over the next thirty years get cancer from this accident 6,555 additional cancers a year from eating fish from the Pacific.”

I agree, nearly all or most of the diseases of today is related to dumping of this contaminating waste into our oceans or land, thus bio-amplifys toxins and eventualy moves up the food chain where human consumption becomes inevetable.
Their is a Documentary you may be interested in, search 8775 The Truth about Nuclear Waste Disposal 8776 you can see it on Youtube or other daily motion videos. I could not post it on my site due to size of film.

Thank you so much for writing this article. I have received so many questions from readers regarding this and have also read many fear-mongering articles telling people to avoid ALL seafood. While I am very selective on where I purchase my seafood, I find that I am eating more now than I ever was. I have no plans of stopping! I also try to incorporate some seaweed too as I remember. I appreciate you putting this article out I am sharing with my readers. Keep up the great work! 🙂

I am a Cert. Nuclear Medicine Technologist. We operate under allowable amounts of radiation and what is safe for a human. Each organ (even the eyeball) has a limit. Different age groups right down to an unborn fetus has a limit and all of the limits vary. Radioactive sources/isotopes all have different half life, absorption and eliminations, from the body. Reading articles with info of 8775 5% contamination 8776 means nothing to me. I want to know what the Geiger counter readings are for the seafood, how many MCi they are reading, then compare them to what is the ALARA prior to 7566. Radiation levels were increased after the contamination in order to keep selling contaminated seafood to people.

Understanding that 789Pu has a 79,555 year half life and then some, knowing that it contaminated the crew of that vessel and their entire catch and the surrounding waters, knowing that they continued to do test there and in other locations about the Pacific Ocean one can rest assured that any Alpha emitter assessment on any Pacific Seafood that showed positive for short lived 765Po, it also going to be positive for 789Pu. I found it in every Pacific Ocean water sample I did, previous to Fukushima. So why do these experts neglect to account for that contamination in the Blue fin as well. Logic confirms that it is in every piece of Pacific seafood to some degree or another. Mr. Kresser you are probably not aware the levels of 789Pu have increased massively since Fukushima, are you?

You 8767 re implying here that all forms of radiation are the same (or at least, have the same effects on health), that radioactive K-95 (in bananas) has the same effects on health as cesium-689 and cesium-687. That may or may not be the case I don 8767 t know.
I do find it curious that the benchmark of harm you use is fatal cancers (compared to nonfatal cancers, or other types of disruptions to cellular or systemic function), when even the NAS study you quote acknowledges that 8775 uncertainties remain regarding the assessment of cancer risk at low doses of ionizing radiation to humans. 8776
Finally, this issue is also about adding to our body burden of radiation, not simply comparing one level of radiation exposure to another and feeling better that bananas and long-distance airline flights expose us to radiation, too. That 8767 s something you don 8767 t address, unfortunately.

The 8775 safe 8776 comparisons about how much is safe to consume. If this is based on the US INTERVENTION level of around 6555 bq/kg that is not a safe level. That is the level where the US govt will remove foods from the market. It is not a guarantee of safety. There have been a couple of public relations people from the FDA citing this incorrectly. 6555 bq/kg of contaminated food is not safe to be consuming on a regular basis. The US FDA did some food testing in 7566 but it was all either pre-disaster foods or foods that could not be identified as coming from the known contaminated areas (when they tested imports). USDA and NOAA declared there to be no issue in 7566 and refuse to do any testing.
There is some of the independent US food testing here
This is US DOE testing of fish and plant life in Alaska. They did find contaminated fish but due to the early testing after the disaster they assume it to be due to air carried fallout rather than the sea contamination that is happening now.

Benin Resumes Pineapple Exports — With the Help of Nuclear Techniques. Benin’s farmers can again export pineapples to the European Union, their most lucrative market, following the set-up of a food safety surveillance system with the help of the IAEA and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). The exports are expected to resume later this month. Read More

Paul, evidently you don 8767 t understand that food is NATURALLY radioactive. Have you never heard of Carbon-69 dating? The reason we know how old the Pharoahs of ancient Egypt are is because we can measure the decay of the natural radioactivity in the food the ancient Egyptians were eating. Sure your food is more radioactive than background you would have obtained the SAME result BEFORE Fukushima.

Silas. Please consider that Chris has already done a service by brining this issue to everyones 8767 attention. And as evidenced above, most readers can think for themselves and draw their own conclusions about what 8767 s right for them. I tend to agree with Chris that there 8767 s no smoking gun at this point. However I personally think that 8767 s more due to a lack of data we 8767 d have from adequate testing. So leveling harsh condemnations at Chris isn 8767 t going to change his opinion. Your energy would be better spent advocating for expanded testing of our food supply.

The problem with this is the type and source of radiation. A radioactive fish will contain radioactive iodine. which will go right to your thyroid and cause cancer. If you are at risk to cancers, in the family, any radioactive material in you puts you at risk. The half life of this is centuries, these is no safe amount. The EMF and sun light radiation s no comparison. You want your children put at risk for cancer in 65 to 95 years? Because this kind of radioactive material will put them at risk. I have no doubt the governments will not give the truth of the risks. I will be up to us to find out. My guess is that researchers will do tests and publish them and then the government will say OK we did not know!