Low levels of radiation found in US milk.

page: 1
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 05:35 PM
link   
Very interesting to say the least......
Actually I'm not sure what to say.




WASHINGTON – The Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration say that very low levels of radiation have turned up in a sample of milk from Washington state. But federal officials say consumers should not worry.

The FDA said such findings are to be expected in the coming days because of the nuclear crisis in Japan, and that the levels are expected to drop relatively quickly.

Results from a March 25 milk sample taken from Spokane, Wash., show levels of radioactive Iodine-131 that are still 5,000 times below levels of concern set by the FDA, including levels set for infants and children.

The EPA said it is increasing the level of nationwide monitoring of milk, precipitation and drinking water following the crisis at the Japanese nuclear power plant.








SOURCE


edit on 3/30/2011 by TheSilverGate because: added quote
edit on 3/30/2011 by TheSilverGate because: (no reason given)
edit on Wed Mar 30 2011 by DontTreadOnMe because: IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS




posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 05:40 PM
link   
I'm allergic to milk anyway.



But seriously I think this is bad news. I hope they don't find any radiation in the Ramen Noodles.



posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by TheSilverGate
 



Guess obama's wrong again, at least accoring to this news report. www.nationaljournal.com...
gonna be interesting to see just how far this goes.



posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 05:45 PM
link   
We all knew that this was just a matter of time before our foods started showing signs of this, and its unfortunate there is much more to come. I think its time to invest in a Geiger counter before they get too ridiculously pricey. S&F Excellent find.



posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by TheSilverGate
 





The FDA said such findings are to be expected in the coming days because of the nuclear crisis in Japan, and that the levels are expected to drop relatively quickly.


how can they say the levels will drop quickly when the source has not stopped producing???
edit on 30-3-2011 by okiecowboy because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by TheSilverGate
 


Nice find and I have nothing really to add here but this quote spooks me a bit "that the levels are expected to drop relatively quickly." Was it not just 10 days ago we were told everything was being contained and nothing is "expected to reach North America"?

I am afraid to even think what we are going to be told (sold) in the next 10 days or so.
This is very important as we are talking milk here so I figure it means all foods and liquids now.
S&F
Regards, Iwinder



posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 05:46 PM
link   
Why even report this to the public if there is no real danger?

Next they will say don't eat bananas because they are radioactive also! Oh yea, they are!



posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 05:47 PM
link   
Just come across this, seems interesting.
Radiation levels safe?




Harvey Wasserman edits www.nukefree.org. He is author of SOLARTOPIA! OUR GREEN-POWERED EARTH and co-author, with Bob Fitrakis, Norman Solomon and Eleanor Walters, of KILLING OUR OWN: THE DISASTER OF AMERICA’S EXPERIENCE WITH ATOMIC RADIATION. Read the unvarnished truth, not the corporate spin. Just as with chemical hazards, there are different versions of what constitutes ‘safe’ exposure. We believe Mr. Wasserman and his colleagues, not ‘official’ sources.

[Note: "TMI" in this case is an acronym for Three Mile Island.]

“Safe” Radiation is a Lethal TMI Lie

By Harvey Wasserman

There is no safe dose of radiation.

We do not x-ray pregnant women.

Any detectable fallout can kill.

With erratic radiation spikes, major air and water emissions and at least three reactors and waste pools in serious danger at Fukushima, we must prepare for the worst.

When you hear the terms “safe” and “insignificant” in reference to radioactive fallout, ask yourself: “Safe for whom?” “Insignificant to which of us?”




LINK



posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by okiecowboy
 


Good question. I was wondering the same thing, especially after reading this morning that japan is saying it may take 3-5 years to cool the reactors.



posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by okiecowboy
 


Exactly my thoughts.
If there is still no containment then why are there reports of lowered radiation in japan?(seen itposted here earlier)
And how can we predict lower levels because there will be a sharp drop in rad levels....do they mean rad levels we get shown? or factual levels?



posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 05:55 PM
link   
I know this site has been posted several times here on ATS, but I feel it is prudent to post it again after reading the OP and this may help some people to see what is what.
It is not a Government site nor do they claim to be but I think a second opinion is warranted here and maybe even more trustworthy.
Link here www.enviroreporter.com...
Regards, Iwinder



posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 06:02 PM
link   
reply to post by WildWorld
 


Yes, I read that too, I'll just say that my immediate thought on that was not a very appropriate one to repeat.
That being said, if they try to toss water on these reactors for 3-5 years and thats the solution...with no containment/entombment it will just build over time.





How long does nuclear radiation last?

All radioactive substances decay over time. Some take fractions of seconds, others many thousands of years.

In theory all radio active substances stay slightly radio active and are never completely inert. That’s why it is more appropriate to use the ‘half-life’ of a radio active substance to indicate its level of radio activity. Its half life is the time it takes for its radio activity to fall by half.

For example, if the radioactivity of a radioactive substance fell by half every two years, its half life would be two years. You notice that it takes much longer for its radio activity to fall to very low levels and that after six years it would have dropped to one-eight of its radio activity.

At every step of its decay the radio active substance transforms into another substance as the composition of the nuclei in its atoms changes.

The half-life of uranium 238 is 4.5 billion years. That means that within that time half of the remaining uranium 238 will have decayed.





Source



posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 06:08 PM
link   
From the source:


Results from a March 25 milk sample taken from Spokane, Wash., show levels of radioactive Iodine-131 that are still 5,000 times below levels of concern set by the FDA, including levels set for infants and children.


Radiation. Scary word. Don't take your kids outside unless it's cloudy:


The sun's rays contain two types of ultraviolet radiation that reach your skin: UVA and UVB. UVB radiation burns the upper layers of skin (the epidermis), causing sunburns.


kidshealth.org...

Chill people.



posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 06:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Iwinder
 


Thanks Iwinder added it to my bookmarks.
Good site to keep up with for information.
It's always good to know what the ''norm'' of things may be, milk as far as I have found isn't a ''norm'' tho that's the reason there is concern.



posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by TheSilverGate
 


Well thats just great just when I was starting to enjoy raw milk from a local farm
If this could potentially take years to stop then at what point does constant marination in radiation even if it's the stated low level become lethal?

I couldn't resist
WARNING LANGUAGE
edit on 30-3-2011 by Silverado292 because: TS SCI Req.



posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheSilverGate
reply to post by Iwinder
 


Thanks Iwinder added it to my bookmarks.
Good site to keep up with for information.
It's always good to know what the ''norm'' of things may be, milk as far as I have found isn't a ''norm'' tho that's the reason there is concern.


I could not agree more with you, when they start talking milk it is in the food chain and almost everybody does milk.
I figure if its in the milk then its in the hay and grass and wheat and corn and so on and so on.....
Not good.
Regards, Iwinder



posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by intrepid
 


do you really think the effects of a sunburn compare to the effects of iodine-131

I am not saying the levels detected are anything to worry much about yet....but comparing to a sunburn??

and yes..I know we have background radiation all around us...even from bananas...but it is not exactly the same



posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheSilverGate
reply to post by okiecowboy
 



If there is still no containment then why are there reports of lowered radiation in japan?


The recent lower radiation levels in Japan are probably due to the easterly wind directions the past few days- blowing the radiation out to sea instead of onto land. Once the wind direction changes to the north or south, levels will again rise on land in Japan.
edit on 30-3-2011 by MedievalGhost because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by okiecowboy
 


Again, from the source material:


Results from a March 25 milk sample taken from Spokane, Wash., show levels of radioactive Iodine-131 that are still 5,000 times below levels of concern set by the FDA, including levels set for infants and children.


5000 times below levels......

This is just fear mongering. That's why I brought up the sun reference.



posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 06:29 PM
link   
Yes ..this is fearmongering ...thread title is scary ... calm down people ...nobody can hide information if US was facing dangerous level of radiation ..for now US is safe





new topics
top topics
 
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join