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.

 

Fukushima radiation… what you need to know and why

page: 19
60
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 09:29 PM
link   

donlashway
'R. M. Sievert, the famous radiologist, who had supervised radiation therapy since 1926 at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, pointed out at an international meeting in 1950 that `there is no known tolerance level for radiation'.[14] A tolerance level is a level below which there is no damage (sometimes called a threshold).
You can interpret that to mean if there is a threshold, we don't know what it is. But, this doesn't mean that there isn't a threshold. Also, that was in 1950, and we've learned some things since then. This is from 1998:

Threshold models in radiation carcinogenesis

Cancer incidence and mortality data from the atomic bomb survivors cohort has been analyzed to allow for the possibility of a threshold dose response. The same dose-response models as used in the original papers were fit to the data. The estimated cancer incidence from the fitted models over-predicted the observed cancer incidence in the lowest exposure group. This is consistent with a threshold or non-linear dose-response at low-doses. Thresholds were added to the dose-response models and the range of possible thresholds is shown for both solid tumor cancers as well as the different leukemia types. This analysis suggests that the A-bomb cancer incidence data agree more with a threshold or non-linear dose-response model than a purely linear model although the linear model is statistically equivalent.
So, the threshold and linear (no-threshold) models are statistically equivalent if you exclude mortality data and look at cancer incidence rates.

If you consider mortality data, what happens?


This observation is not found with the mortality data. For both the incidence data and the mortality data the addition of a threshold term significantly improves the fit to the linear or linear-quadratic dose response for both total leukemias and also for the leukemia subtypes of ALL, AML, and CML.
So, the mortality data does seem to show a threshold in this study. But my position is that the jury is still out and the data is not conclusive, though I think it's just as likely there's a threshold as not based on the data I've seen. Maybe the threshold model has a slight edge as implied by this study, but I think more data is needed for a definitive conclusion about thresholds.




posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 10:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


If we understand a single atom of ionizing radiation does us harm as a foundation to our understanding I think it would help.

Denying it leads to confusion.

Adding up exposures becomes grade school math.

Absolutely not trying to fear monger or frighten anyone just the reality I see.

And I haven't given up hope, people will wake up before it's too late...




Is the radiation limit really that point which society can no longer function? Isn't it too late then ?

edit on 21-1-2014 by donlashway because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 10:46 PM
link   
TV: Nuclear workers “stripped naked, soaked in sweat… gasping for air” — “My teeth started breaking off” — “It’s as if they are the living dead” — “Democracy destroyed in areas where nuclear power exists” (VIDEO)
Published: January 20th, 2014 at 9:08 pm ET
By ENENews
Email Article Email Article
62 comments
Tweet

Channel 4 (UK) ‘Nuclear Ginza’ Part II, Kenji Higuchi, 1995:

Kenji Higuchi, photographer: I’ll never forget what it was like the heat and the darkness, workers stripped naked soaked in sweat, they stood in an oxygen tent gasping for air. [...]

Kunio Murai, nuclear worker: My teeth started breaking off, bit by bit. I don’t have any upper teeth now […] my hair fell out. [...]

Higuchi: I have met people who have bled from the gums, ears, nose. Who have been violently sick and suffer from diarrhea immediately after being exposed. They suffer from profound lethargy. The way they explain it, it is as if they are the living dead, only from the outside do they look normal. Damage to the testes and to the eyes is common. Chronic anemia, tumors of the skin,, thyroid, bone, larynx, pharynx and lung. Loss of teeth and hair, low immunity to infection, accelerated aging, depression, anxiety […]

At 4:00 in

Higuchi: The laborers are still in the hands of labor bosses and the Japanese mafia, the Yakuza.



posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 11:31 PM
link   

donlashway
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


If we understand a single atom of ionizing radiation does us harm as a foundation to our understanding I think it would help.

Denying it leads to confusion.
Let's say we have about 50,000,000,000,000 cells in our body. Let's say the single atom you speak of kills a cell. leaving only 49,999,999,999,999 cells. If you never made any new cells, that might concern you, but you do make new cells, in nearly all tissues of the body, at an amazing rate:

www.nytimes.com...

Although people may think of their body as a fairly permanent structure, most of it is in a state of constant flux as old cells are discarded and new ones generated in their place. Each kind of tissue has its own turnover time, depending in part on the workload endured by its cells. The cells lining the stomach, as mentioned, last only five days. The red blood cells, bruised and battered after traveling nearly 1,000 miles through the maze of the body's circulatory system, last only 120 days or so on average before being dispatched to their graveyard in the spleen.

The epidermis, or surface layer of the skin, is recycled every two weeks or so. The reason for the quick replacement is that "this is the body's saran wrap, and it can be easily damaged by scratching, solvents, wear and tear," said Elaine Fuchs, an expert on the skin's stem cells at the Rockefeller University.

As for the liver, the detoxifier of all the natural plant poisons and drugs that pass a person's lips, its life on the chemical-warfare front is quite short. An adult human liver probably has a turnover time of 300 to 500 days, said Markus Grompe, an expert on the liver's stem cells at the Oregon Health & Science University.

Other tissues have lifetimes measured in years, not days, but are still far from permanent. Even the bones endure nonstop makeover. The entire human skeleton is thought to be replaced every 10 years or so in adults, as twin construction crews of bone-dissolving and bone-rebuilding cells combine to remodel it.

About the only pieces of the body that last a lifetime, on present evidence, seem to be the neurons of the cerebral cortex, the inner lens cells of the eye and perhaps the muscle cells of the heart.
So if the cell that died is a stomach cell, where's the harm when every cell in your stomach will die in the next 5 days anyway? The only possible harm I see from a cell death is if the cell that dies is one of the few mentioned that aren't replaced, and those areas of the body are pretty well protected thus some of the least likely to be affected by radiation.



posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 11:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Yea, that's where I want to start one ionizing radiation particle; alpha, gama or beta causing damage.
To this we can both agree?
Would others also agree?
If so maybe this could be that foundation I was looking to build on.

That one ionizing radiation particle; alpha, gama or beta an indication of the presents of one Bq; becquerel (One Bq is defined as the activity of a quantity of radioactive material in which one nucleus decays per second)

Can we all agree ?
edit on 22-1-2014 by donlashway because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 12:23 AM
link   

mikell
reply to post by OOOOOO
 


Got a link for the 50k spill at Fermi I don't seem to find anything.



Yea I could not find much either, but from this accident Oct 5th 1066, is where term China syndrome came from. They try a cover much of this info up just as in Fukushima. In the Fermi accident they say they proceeded to shut the thing down normal, but really they lost the Sodium cooling and they did not have a clue as to what to do.
I was at Fermi in the 80s, they say the problem was a plate of metal fell off and was sucked into the pump impeller blades , I was told it was really a beer can, which sound more plausible, especially with the mental aptitude of those involved back then.
But they had those drums sitting there for years, with sodium and water, from what I understand now they have dumped much more than 50.000 gallons of water into Lake Erie but more like 500,000, from 1993 reports.
This water dumping is common practice with these Nuclear Power Plants, world wide, and also much to the complaints of those who wish to preserve the Great Lakes in particular.

There is the Book "We almost lost Detroit".



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 12:23 AM
link   
Delete Double post, now I only push it once?
edit on 22-1-2014 by OOOOOO because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 12:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


From what I understand in some cases it's not the minimal number of cells that die, but the ones that do not die and are just damaged. If it is in excess amount of damaged cells that the killer cells , T-cells can not clean up and remove and these cells go on and dived in a mutated state, is when becomes problem, cancer. Or if you get enough to kill a whole lot of cells at once then in essence your body just melts, like one of those star fishes.


edit on 22-1-2014 by OOOOOO because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 12:48 AM
link   

donlashway
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Yea, that's where I want to start one ionizing radiation particle; alpha, gama or beta causing damage.


Down that road, you also have to address the constant damage going on inside your cells just from normal metabolic processes. Cells are constantly being damaged, constantly dying, constantly being replaced, constantly repairing themselves. Each and every one has internal sources of ionizing damage. That's why you have a lot of repair mechanisms.



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 12:56 AM
link   

donlashway
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Yea, that's where I want to start one ionizing radiation particle; alpha, gama or beta causing damage.
To this we can both agree?
It's like saying peeing in the pacific ocean raises the level of the ocean.

I can make arguments proving it's true and arguments proving it's not true, and both have some validity.

When the magnitude of what you refer to is so insignificant as to not be measurable, it's probably not the most productive debate of semantics to argue one way or the other.


OOOOOO
If it is in excess amount of damaged cells
My friend, you have stated in different words the concept of a threshold, when you say this. While some people are arguing that there is no threshold, I'm somewhat neutral on this issue, saying that there is some evidence for a threshold, but it's not well defined or conclusive yet due to lack of evidence and the difficulty of measuring small effects.
edit on 22-1-2014 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 01:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


its not the death of a cell......... that's the principle behind radiation therapy to kill cancer cells


One of 4 things happens when a radionuclide is next to a cell:

1. Track(s) across the cell and the cell is not damaged.
2. Track(s) across the cell and the cell is damaged but repairs itself prior to replication.
3. Track(s) across the cell and the cell dies.
4. Track(s) across the cell and the cell is damaged and is unable to repair itself prior to replication.

As far as I know this basic theory still stands, if anyone knows different please say so.

Number 4 is where cancer and mutations come into play.

Tracks can never be less than one, and I do not know if there is a upper limit.




edit on 22-1-2014 by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-1-2014 by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 01:28 AM
link   
reply to post by RickinVa
 


Add four -

tracks across the cell, the cell is unable to repair the damage, fails to detect the damage, and dies during mitosis

tracks across the cell, the cell is unable to repair the damage but detects that it is damaged, apoptosis is triggered

tracks across the cell, the cell is unable to repair the damage, does not detect it, undergoes mitosis properly, but no longer fulfills its function. It does not become "immortalized" and dies out after it hits its Hayflick limit.

tracks across the cell, is unable to repair the damage, does not undergo apoptosis, and enables the genes to produce telomerase, thus becoming "immortal", and begins to replicate without check. That's the only one where you get 'cancer' per se.


edit on 22-1-2014 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 01:34 AM
link   

OOOOOO
I was told it was really a beer can, which sound more plausible...


It was a molten sodium reactor, you can't have it open to air for a beer can to fall into, so it's not that plausible.

What we were taught was, (IIRC), that they had added some structures to the bottom of the reactor as a late addition. These were to spread out the corium in the event of a meltdown so that it couldn't fall into a single reactive lump in the bottom. The "spikes" were covered with plates of thin aluminum. One came loose and stuck over the pump intake like a baby in a swimming pool. That's when the fun started.



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 01:41 AM
link   

Bedlam
reply to post by RickinVa
 


Add four -

tracks across the cell, the cell is unable to repair the damage, fails to detect the damage, and dies during mitosis

tracks across the cell, the cell is unable to repair the damage but detects that it is damaged, apoptosis is triggered

tracks across the cell, the cell is unable to repair the damage, does not detect it, undergoes mitosis properly, but no longer fulfills its function. It does not become "immortalized" and dies out after it hits its Hayflick limit.

tracks across the cell, is unable to repair the damage, does not undergo apoptosis, and enables the genes to produce telomerase, thus becoming "immortal", and begins to replicate without check. That's the only one where you get 'cancer' per se.


edit on 22-1-2014 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



Thanks... I won't pretend I am any sort of expert... I just try to keep it basic so people will have a general idea.... if you throw too much info at them, their eyes glaze over and they go into a coma....especially here in ATS land LOL
edit on 22-1-2014 by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 01:41 AM
link   
A good Report:
Fukushima: Fear and Fallout

The new American, Pdf



Based on current statistics the discharge from Fukushima
is less than half the exposure
“we all get from the global consumption of bananas,”
Tim Worstall quipped,
pointing out we eat the radioactive potassium in that fruit



edit on 22-1-2014 by Human0815 because: quote

edit on 22-1-2014 by Human0815 because: The New American



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 01:57 AM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


www.japantimes.co.jp...


Tepco said Wednesday it detected 200,000 becquerels per liter of beta ray-emitting radioactive substances, including strontium-90, far above the legal limit of 30 becquerels per liter, as well as cesium-134 and -137, both within their legal limits.


At a 1,000 liters per ton, 300 tons per day, is 300,000 liters per day, for 600 days, 180,000,000 Liters into the ocean, of 200,000 Bq per liter, is 36,000,000,000,000. Ok, that is where they are getting 20 to 40 TBq total.

But we have an observation well with 710,000 becquerels per liter.

Radioisotope for medical diagnosis 70 million Bq.

Still doesn't convert to Sieverts. How long would a fish survive swimming in 200,000 Bqs per liter of water when the limit is 30 Bq per liter? What happens at the limit of 30 Bqs? 30 TBqs per liter should contaminate 30 Trillion liters of water at the limit.

The entire Pacific will not blend like a margarita, at least 3/4 of that water is deep ocean, and essentially doesn't circulate with the top waters where all the fish live. The California Current is about 10 to 13 million cubic meters per second, about 315 T cubic liters per year. A large portion of the current going past Japan winds up in the California current, but for numbers, say 50%. Rough estimate 5 T Bqs per year into 315 T cubic M of ocean circulation. That is about 15 M Bqs per liter, which is about 20% of the radiation exposure from an X-ray machine. That is alot.



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 02:00 AM
link   
reply to post by raymundoko
 


I have yet to see those links that back up your claims.

I have read lots of claims, but nothing to back up those claims.


(post by raymundoko removed for a manners violation)

posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 09:21 PM
link   
Fukushima.... the gift that keeps on giving.....


3,100,000 bq per liter of beta emitters... that's straight from Tepco... no need to source it


it just keeps getting better..... does it bother anybody that after almost three years and Tepco's expert handling of the situation that we keep seeing "new records" of radiation being found?


I find this troublesome to say the least...... its looking more and more like at least one of the cores has done an Elvis and left the building.... it just doesn't make sense for the readings to keep spiking at new levels all the time.


Attack the ball not the player guys, personal attacks are not cool nor are they allowed.




edit on 22-1-2014 by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-1-2014 by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-1-2014 by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-1-2014 by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-1-2014 by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 11:31 PM
link   

***ATTENTION***

Personal attacks and off-topic remarks are not conducive to a healthy conversation. Further violations will result in potential posting bans.

Please discuss the topic, not each other.

~Tenth
ATS Super Mod




new topics

top topics



 
60
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join