Simon Fraser Presentation in BC Radiation

British Columbia Exposure from the Fukushima Fallout: KrisStarosta

Dr. Krzysztof Starosta gives this talk:

Per litre of rain we have something between 10 000 000 particles of various cesium and 20 000 000 in San Francisco, the highest amount given.

But surprise surprise, the Super Freeway of the Jet stream gave scientist's this wonderful knew scoop on how swiftly the plume of radiation covered the West Hemisphere, and with very little absorption into the neighboring air masses along the way, it remained fairly intact from what I gathered. Nice of them to discover how swift that jet stream and plume really is. (sarcasm, plus feeling a little ill from this)

I don't know, but is 10 000 000 - 20 000 000 particles of cesium per litre of rain water, hazardous? Does this measure high or low on the radiation levels?

My mind went black while typing and couldnt recall the word I meant for how fast and efficiently that jetstream sent the Nuclear Plume our way, I was trying to say, how little disbursement took place over the Pacific.

enenews.com...

Radioactive Iodine-131 in rainwater sample near San Francisco 18,100% above federal drinking water standard....

I am very concerned that we're never going to get direct answers here, but how does the figures found in the each litre in the SFU study in BC, and this article, relate to this study:

www.nuc.berkeley.edu...

For example, in the rain water we collected in 18 hours between March 17 and March 18 we observe an activity of the isotope of I-131 (Iodine-131) of 4.26 Bq/l. At this level, you would need to drink 632 liters of this rain water to obtain the same radiation effects you obtain on a round-trip flight between San Francisco and Washington D.C. Therefore, the increase in radiation levels in the rain water due to the events in Japan remain extremely small.

So what is the real answer? And how high a level is 10 000 000- 20 000 000 particles of cesium in a litre of rain water to public health?

An 8 day half life is probably bearable in those amounts....but what of the really long half lives?
Ive no idea which ones.....exactly but ive understood the half life of the depleted uranium ammo we use to be 500,000,000yrs....
Something like that would be cumulative in our and the earths systems wouldnt it?
The real danger two or three generations or even thousands of years away.....

reply to post by stirling


I have this suspicion its a cumulative affect. Besides when they say short term half lives, that still isn't the full affect. But they're leaving out that this isn't stopping. There is no time when its not ticking away on the half life, because we're getting constant doses, especially if there is precipitation.

And a couple of little things I had bookmarked from 011.
Spike in B.C. sudden infant deaths concerns coroner
www.cbc.ca...
They were so concerned they ended up blaming the parents.

Canadians suspicious over radiation testing of seafood — Official “puzzled” gov’t withholding where samples were taken
enenews.com...
indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com...

Chernobyl today. What was that about short term and half-lives? lol