It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New gov’t study finds Fukushima radiation in US marine life

page: 1
16
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 5 2016 @ 06:53 AM
link   

U.S. Department of Commerce – NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service (pdf), Dec 2015 (emphasis added): Results of testing for Fukushima Radiation in northern fur seals on St. Paul Island, AK – In summer 2014, NOAA Fisheries in partnership with Colorado State University collected tissue from northern fur seals harvested from St. Paul Island for lab testing of the radiation levels… We detected very small amounts of Fukushima-derived radioactive material in the seal tissue…
New gov’t study finds Fukushima radiation in US marine life




I posted before that I wouldn't link to Enenews anymore. I don't endorse their site but in this case, it's all laid out beautifully.

I'll try and head off the usual 'arguments' at the pass here:

1. "This is fearmongering."

No, it's reporting of scientific facts.

2. "The levels of radiation being found aren't lethal yet."

Stick around. No promises in Fukushima cleanup, director says

There's no telling how long this is going to last.

3. "Cesium 134/137 aren't too lethal anyway."

"Wherever there's radiation cesium, there's going to be plutonium." - Arnie Gundersen
Source: Nuclear Expert in Japan: Plutonium “is everywhere… it is everywhere”

4. "Plutonium isn't lethal."

Please provide sources when you make your claims/arguments. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
edit on 5-3-2016 by Profusion because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 5 2016 @ 07:00 AM
link   
I don't know much about this subject. Is it one of those things we just have to hope for the best now? Like cancer, maybe you could have prevented it but too late.



posted on Mar, 5 2016 @ 07:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion
Yeaaah, plutonium isn't lethal, it is the 100% chance that ingested plutonium will give you cancer that tends to be lethal.
Fukushima sucks.



posted on Mar, 5 2016 @ 07:11 AM
link   
Fuku is the real deal.

It's not gonna kill us ... but we are gonna be changed.



posted on Mar, 5 2016 @ 07:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

Yeah, this is fear mongering.

0.550Gl/kg in the tuna? Codex Guideline states that 1000Bg/kg is the maximum allowed.

www.fao.org...



posted on Mar, 5 2016 @ 08:08 AM
link   
Most definitely fear mongering. You still have no clue how incredibly low and insignificant a fraction of a becareul is. No detectable health impact. You're more at risk from fluctuations in natural background radiation.
edit on 5-3-2016 by pl3bscheese because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2016 @ 08:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Chadwickus

I believe the best deterrent for fear is knowledge. Can you please tell me what not to fear in the op?



posted on Mar, 5 2016 @ 08:12 AM
link   
a reply to: MOMof3

Ignorance. That's what's presented. It's glaringly obvious in the list brought up. No weighing of the facts, and hey, that she even makes up a phony quote on number four shows where her values are.




edit on 5-3-2016 by pl3bscheese because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2016 @ 08:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
Most definitely fear mongering. You still have no clue how incredibly low and insignificant a fraction of a becareul is. No detectable health impact. You're more at risk from fluctuations in natural background radiation.

Unless you ingest the source of those 'background' elements. In the case of background a cosmic ray from deep space is through you and gone, same with other 'rays' from anywhere. The problem arises when radioactive contamination in the environment around you becomes lodged in the body and irradiates nearby cells in its decay path.

Heres a pic of what that looks like with a small bit of PU…



(post by pl3bscheese removed for a manners violation)

posted on Mar, 5 2016 @ 08:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
Most definitely fear mongering. You still have no clue how incredibly low and insignificant a fraction of a becareul is. No detectable health impact. You're more at risk from fluctuations in natural background radiation.


Problem is the alpha rays.

The alpha rays in natural background radiation are stopped by clothing and the skin.

It's a whole new ballgame once ingested though.......think radon gas.



posted on Mar, 5 2016 @ 08:50 AM
link   
a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys

You forgot to mention "partially". Your statement as-is is false.



posted on Mar, 5 2016 @ 08:52 AM
link   
a reply to: pl3bscheese

You are incorrect.

Alpha rays are completely absorbed by the skin. They do not penetrate.

Maybe you are thinking of beta and/or gamma rays?

science.howstuffworks.com...
edit on 5-3-2016 by IslandOfMisfitToys because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2016 @ 08:55 AM
link   
a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys

I was thinking of background radiation, which would include alpha, beta, and gamma. All of which would be potentially harmful to human health.
edit on 5-3-2016 by pl3bscheese because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2016 @ 08:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys

I was thinking of background radiation, which would include alpha, beta, and gamma. All of which would be potentially harmful to human health.


But when you ingest radioactive material you have now introduced a third type of radioactive ray into your body that doesn't apply just from background radiation. The alpha ray. 3 is more than 2 correct?

edit on 5-3-2016 by IslandOfMisfitToys because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2016 @ 09:00 AM
link   
a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys

It's true, but the point is that at the levels detected, no statistically significant health impacts will be expected. I've linked this several times already on this site.



posted on Mar, 5 2016 @ 09:03 AM
link   
a reply to: pl3bscheese


Don't waste your breath. Everybody freaks at the radioactive boogie man.



posted on Mar, 5 2016 @ 09:05 AM
link   
a reply to: pl3bscheese

In one sample.

What happens when a person eats alot of it?

It may be fear mongering at this point but it is something to watch and look out for.

Who needs any amount of new radiation anyway? Don't we have enough already?
edit on 5-3-2016 by IslandOfMisfitToys because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2016 @ 09:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: pl3bscheese


Don't waste your breath. Everybody freaks at the radioactive boogie man.


As they should. It's not something to be messed with.



posted on Mar, 5 2016 @ 09:10 AM
link   
a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys

What "one sample"? There have been numerous samples showing insignificant levels of radiation. Humans have adapted to these insignificant levels over the eons. It's been in what we eat, drink, and breathe long before fuku. I mean most of the cesium on our coasts exists because of earlier testing, not fuku. No end of the world, sorry. I would posit life requiring various stressors, including radiation in order to successfully adapt to ever changing terrains. Life requires it, but within certain thresholds.
edit on 5-3-2016 by pl3bscheese because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
16
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join