#Login Register


  • 241 Vote(s) - 3.75 Average
Home 


The Fukushima Disaster
03-03-2013, 05:22 AM #1,171
UniqueStranger Art in my heart
Posts:14,881 Threads:420 Joined:Jun 2012
Quote:Fukushima: Cancer Risk Seen in Japanese Infants

http://www.medpagetoday.com/PublicHealth...alth/37611
Anonymous Kritter Show this Post
03-11-2013, 04:56 PM #1,172
Anonymous Kritter Incognito Anonymous
 




cum odio sui coepit veritas. Simul atque inimica est
03-11-2013, 05:18 PM #1,173
UniqueStranger Art in my heart
Posts:14,881 Threads:420 Joined:Jun 2012
(03-11-2013, 04:56 PM)Anonymous Kritter Wrote:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLI54fGK8nY


cum odio sui coepit veritas. Simul atque inimica est


03-11-2013, 05:59 PM #1,174
Octo Mother Superior
Posts:42,571 Threads:1,469 Joined:Feb 2011
İmage
03-12-2013, 01:27 AM #1,175
Mister Kitters (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
Posts:518 Threads:52 Joined:Mar 2013
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world...i/1977883/

I question the general assumption that felines are inherently deficient in the area of grammar and sentence structure.
03-12-2013, 05:33 AM #1,176
WEBWAR REFUGEE K Member
Posts:174 Threads:32 Joined:Mar 2013
I avoided this thread because it reminds me of my own mortality
but for all is worth Fukushima is an E.L.E not your Hollywood fare deliver it a 120 min format
but is an E.L.E all the samedamned.gif
03-12-2013, 06:09 AM #1,177
Octo Mother Superior
Posts:42,571 Threads:1,469 Joined:Feb 2011
We keep it pinned as a reminder of that. tissueguy.gif
03-16-2013, 02:56 PM #1,178
UniqueStranger Art in my heart
Posts:14,881 Threads:420 Joined:Jun 2012
The cesium levels have risen, or are still rising, in fish caught in the waters around Japan.

Quote:According to Tepco, the previous record of cesium concentration in fish was 510,000 Bq/kg detected in another greenling captured in the same area. Currently, fishermen are voluntarily suspending operations off the coast of the prefecture except for experimental catches.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/03...ear-plant/

sad2.gif
03-16-2013, 03:03 PM #1,179
UniqueStranger Art in my heart
Posts:14,881 Threads:420 Joined:Jun 2012
Quote:As the Fukushima disaster unfolded, Madigan wondered if radiation would show up in the tuna he studied in California. Sure enough, he and his colleagues found radioactive isotopes from the disaster in 15 bluefins caught by fisherman five months after the tsunami. Radioactive materials from the damaged reactors bled into groundwater and the ocean. Young tuna absorbed cesium 134 and cesium 137 isotopes while swimming in the accident-afflicted area and likely by eating contaminated plankton and small fish.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl...ining-tuna
03-16-2013, 04:10 PM #1,180
オタマジャクシ Member
Posts:1,310 Threads:32 Joined:Nov 2012
Sigh.................

This thread should be renamed - Fukushima isn't the disaster - it is a terrible loss of asset problem and cleanup problem for the utility.
From Wiki:

The National Police Agency has confirmed 15,881 deaths,[22] 6,142 injured,[23] and 2,668 people missing[24] across twenty prefectures.[25]

As of 30 April 2012, 18 people had died and 420 had been injured while participating in disaster recovery or clean-up efforts.[195]

Japanese funerals are normally elaborate Buddhist ceremonies which entail cremation. The thousands of bodies, however, exceeded the capacity of available crematoriums and morgues, many of them damaged,[181][182] and there were shortages of both kerosene—each cremation requires 50 liters—and dry ice for preservation.[183] The single crematorium in Higashimatsushima, for example, could only handle four bodies a day, although hundreds were found there.


Some areas around Miyako have subsided (sunk) 4 feet.

As far as the power plant is concerned

According to a June 2012 Stanford University study, the radiation released could cause 130 deaths from cancer (the lower bound for the estimater being 15 and the upper bound 1100) and 180 cancer cases (the lower bound being 24 and the upper bound 1800), mostly in Japan.

An additional approximately 600 deaths [around Fukushima] have been reported due to non-radiological causes such as mandatory evacuations.

The total radiation casualties to date: there may be 3 children with thyroid cancer.
03-16-2013, 04:19 PM #1,181
UniqueStranger Art in my heart
Posts:14,881 Threads:420 Joined:Jun 2012
Then there's the question -

Quote:The question unanswered is whether the cesium is going to continue to accumulate, and can it be spreading to other species of fish.

http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2013/03/...nia-coast/

Don't Worry, Inc. sad2.gif
03-16-2013, 04:47 PM #1,182
オタマジャクシ Member
Posts:1,310 Threads:32 Joined:Nov 2012
(03-16-2013, 02:56 PM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  The cesium levels have risen, or are still rising, in fish caught in the waters around Japan.

Quote:According to Tepco, the previous record of cesium concentration in fish was 510,000 Bq/kg detected in another greenling captured in the same area. Currently, fishermen are voluntarily suspending operations off the coast of the prefecture except for experimental catches.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/03...ear-plant/

sad2.gif


They are catching these fish in the little breakwater in front of the plant.

TEPCO says it is going to put up steel mesh to block the breakwater then exterminate the fish.

(03-16-2013, 03:03 PM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  
Quote:As the Fukushima disaster unfolded, Madigan wondered if radiation would show up in the tuna he studied in California. Sure enough, he and his colleagues found radioactive isotopes from the disaster in 15 bluefins caught by fisherman five months after the tsunami. Radioactive materials from the damaged reactors bled into groundwater and the ocean. Young tuna absorbed cesium 134 and cesium 137 isotopes while swimming in the accident-afflicted area and likely by eating contaminated plankton and small fish.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl...ining-tuna
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/feb/25/...n-20130225

You are reading reports of the wrong scientists. There are a group of California scientists who have been using the radiation to study fish migration patterns (as opposed to measuring the radioactivity just to bitch about it). They are worried that their window for their study is closing.

The amounts the fish carried were minuscule — far less, ounce for ounce, than the amount of naturally occurring radiation in a banana — but possibly enough for scientists to gain insight into animal migration, the team wrote in their report.

Saw the table for one of these studies - the worst california fish was 0.3% higher than the fish's natural radiation. As of the end of the year the vast majority of the migratory fish in california are ND fish.
03-16-2013, 04:51 PM #1,183
UniqueStranger Art in my heart
Posts:14,881 Threads:420 Joined:Jun 2012
There is this one truth, however -

Quote:Cesium itself is not safe and most people would be smart to not consume tuna from the Pacific Ocean.

http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2013/03/...nia-coast/
03-16-2013, 05:28 PM #1,184
オタマジャクシ Member
Posts:1,310 Threads:32 Joined:Nov 2012
(03-16-2013, 04:51 PM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  There is this one truth, however -

Quote:Cesium itself is not safe and most people would be smart to not consume tuna from the Pacific Ocean.

http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2013/03/...nia-coast/



http://www.ead.anl.gov/pub/doc/potassium.pdf
http://www.evs.anl.gov/pub/doc/Cesium.pdf

The fish in question had about 300 times more radiation from Potassium (K-40) than Cesium (Cs-137).

The biological half-life of Potassium is 30 days and the effective biological half-life of Cesium is 99 days.

So the net effect of the Cesium is about 1/30th that of the natural potassium.

The Omega 3 from the tuna will do more good than the Cesium will do harm (at these levels there isn't any proof the Cesium will cause harm - but that is another story). Who made the "don't eat glowing fish" recommendation is an idiot or a scaremonger.

As long as your yearly exposure is less than 100 mS/A (milliSieverts per Anno) there is no risk. Between 100 mS/A and 2 S/A there is a bare knuckled brawl about whether it makes you sicker or heathier.
03-16-2013, 05:38 PM #1,185
UniqueStranger Art in my heart
Posts:14,881 Threads:420 Joined:Jun 2012
If the scientists don't know, it looks like nobody really knows.

Quote:It is likely that the area of contamination is not being contained by mere fishing nets. It will be years before a complete picture and full know the extent of radioactive contamination in ocean fish supply. It might be best if marine research is conducted locally with our own coastal seals, and with transparent results updated every six months.




Home 




 



DISCLAIMER / Terms of Service (TOS):
Kritterbox.com - Socialize anonymously, commentary, discussion, oddities, technology, music and more!  This website is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. kritterbox.com shall not be liable for any damages whatsoever, including, without limitation, those resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether or not advised of the possibility of damage, and on any theory of liability, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of this site or other documents which are referenced by or linked to this site.
This website exists solely for the purposes of exchange of information, communication and general entertainment. Opinions from posters are in no way endorsed by kritterbox.com. All posts on this website are the opinion of the authors and are not to be taken as statements of fact on behalf of kritterbox.com. This site may contain coarse language or other material that kritterbox.com is in no way responsible for. Material deemed to be offensive or pornographic at the discretion of kritterbox.com shall be removed. kritterbox.com reserves the right to modify, or remove posts and user accounts on this website at our discretion. kritterbox.com disclaims all liability for damages incurred directly or indirectly as a result of any material on this website. Fictitious posts and any similarity to any person living or dead is coincidental.
All users shall limit the insertion of any and all copyrighted material to portions of the article that are relevant to the point being made, with no more than 50%, and preferably less of the original source material. A link shall be visible in text format, embedded directly to the original source material without exception.
No third party links, i.e. blogs or forums will be accepted under any circumstances, and will be edited by staff in order to reflect the original source of copyrighted material, or be removed at the sole discretion of kritterbox.com.
Fair Use Notice:
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Users may make such material available in an effort to advance awareness and understanding of issues relating to economics, individual rights, international affairs, liberty, science, and technology. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for educational and/or research purposes.
This Disclaimer is subject to change at any time at our discretion.
Copyright © 2011 - 2017 kritterbox.com