Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

More than 100 Groups Call on EPA to Withdraw Dramatically Weakened Radiation Guides

page: 1
8

log in

join

posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 02:06 PM
link   
I don't know which forum this should go into - so I put it here because most 'Nuclear' activity seems to center here and this deserves the most widespread audience possible.

It is about Radiation Guidlines in the US, exposure guidlines in the USA.




Over 100 environmental organizations recently called on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy to withdraw EPA’s controversial new Protective Action Guides (PAGs), which would allow exposure to very high doses from radiation releases before the government would take action to protect the public. committeetobridgethegap.org... For example, following a release, EPA proposed relaxing its long-term cleanup standards. It would allow leaving Plutonium-239 in soil used by farmers at levels over 3 million times than that currently allowed.


nuclearactive.org...



Although official estimates of the health risks from radiation exposure have gone up substantially since the old PAGs were written in 1992, the new EPA guidance contemplates radically increased allowable exposures in the intermediate and long-term periods after radiation releases. Diane D’Arrigo of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, said, “Even though EPA now admits radiation is more harmful than previously thought, it is weakening rather than tightening radiation protections.” www.nirs.org...



and more directly related to the Fukushima ongoing contamination of the Pacific Ocean:



There are also proposals to incorporate outdated Food and Drug Administration guidelines which would allow consumption of contaminated food. Such food could contain as much radiation as having a chest X-ray every day. EPA proposed to eliminate requirements to evacuate people threatened with radiation doses to the thyroid and skin over predicted specified limits. The commenters reminded EPA that the PAGs are “doses that are to be avoided by protective actions.”



I guess it is going to get worse.... Peace.

I wanted to add this GEM from a News Release regarding Current FDA contamination standards dated 9/6/13:



The National Academy of Sciences determined that there is no safe dose of radiation. www.nap.edu... The petition states that consumers must have the necessary information in order to manage their own intake of cesium. Currently the FDA standards allow 1,200 Becquerels per kilogram in food, an amount 100 times higher than that allowed in Japan.
edit on 12-10-2013 by FyreByrd because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by FyreByrd
 

Interesting to see they are upping the "allowable" limits and revising such limits from before the turn of the century. I guess thats far back enough that we can't remember what those recommended safe limits were?

Recommended, allowable, minimum, safe... blah blah blah. There wouldn't be any reason to up them lately you think?

From your last excerpt:


The National Academy of Sciences determined that there is no safe dose of radiation.

No "minimum safe dose". Here's an example of why thats true:

Particles of Plutonium



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 03:43 PM
link   

intrptr
reply to post by FyreByrd
 

Interesting to see they are upping the "allowable" limits and revising such limits from before the turn of the century. I guess thats far back enough that we can't remember what those recommended safe limits were?

Recommended, allowable, minimum, safe... blah blah blah. There wouldn't be any reason to up them lately you think?

From your last excerpt:


The National Academy of Sciences determined that there is no safe dose of radiation.

No "minimum safe dose". Here's an example of why thats true:

Particles of Plutonium



Wonderful source - I think you've used it before. It can never be stated enoungh - and the visual is quite powerful. Thank you.



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 03:50 PM
link   
In my opinion, this is being done because we already have dangerous levels of radiation present. I saw an article that said the USA is poisoned as far as Arkansas from the initial Fukushima event.

With radiation levels rising, usable land will become less and less. Just raise the safe levels and we can keep using the land. Keep them where they are and we have a lot of clean-up to do. No one wants to pay for that, if we can at all.

With the leak the way it is, it's only going to get worse.






top topics
 
8

log in

join