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.
According to the prefectural fishery laboratory, 95 percent of the 8,502 samples collected in 2016 showed radioactive cesium at levels that were hardly detectable, while readings for another 422 samples were below the limit.
“We were able to present data that fish and seafood in Fukushima are safe,” said an official of the laboratory, which is hoping to expand the area and scope of sampling.
SOURCE
Citizens for Health, along with the other coalition members of Fukushima Fallout Awareness Network (FFAN Homepage, FFAN on facebook), filed a petition with the FDA to drastically reduce the amount of radioactive cesium permitted in food, from a ridiculous 1200 Bq/kg to 5 Bq/kg (see why here, read why here). The Bq (Becquerel) is a measure of radioactivity. The FDA is now accepting comments on our petition and every person’s voice counts, so leave a comment in support here!
Our petition asks for a binding limit of 5 Bq/kg of cesium 134 & 137 combined in food, nutritional supplements, and pharmaceuticals. This is necessary because of continuing exposure to radiation in the wake of the ongoing catastrophe at Fukushima, where reactors are still releasing radioactivity, along with atomic bomb testing and routine releases from nuclear power plants. We also ask that testing be widespread and, when technologically feasible, measurements below 5 Bq/kg be taken. Through this effort we would like a database of contamination levels to be established and maintained, with information relevant to researchers, so that movement of the cesium radionuclide in our environment can be tracked since it tends to biomagnify once released.
SOURCE
Many people argue that the amount of radioactive cesium permitted in food should be only 5 Bq/kg. The regulatory maximum in Japan is 100 becquerels per kilogram.
originally posted by: EternalShadow
Thanks for bringing this forward considering if you're not researching this ONGOING disaster, you may not be aware of it currently. It has been all but 'wiped' away from mainstream news, and people are STILL eating Pacific seafood!
Here's an interesting comment by one of the researchers, Ken Buesseler:
originally posted by: Profusion
What a spin that is. They're saying that over 99% of the fish are contaminated, but they're counting that as a victory because of an arbitrarily set limit. Many people argue that the amount of radioactive cesium permitted in food should be only 5 becquerels per kilogram. The regulatory maximum in Japan is 100 becquerels per kilogram.
I think what he's saying is a confirmation of what you are saying that we have so-called "safe to eat" limits set but that they are set somewhat arbitrarily since the effects of radiation at low doses are not well understood.
“We can answer ‘is it safe to eat?'” says Buesseler. “But not answer when and why will it be safe to eat.”
It's already started.
www.vox.com...
Americans are also simply living longer, and the overwhelming majority — 86 percent — of all cancers in the US are diagnosed in older people, over the age of 50.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Profusion
It's already started.
Did you read the article you linked?
www.vox.com...
Americans are also simply living longer, and the overwhelming majority — 86 percent — of all cancers in the US are diagnosed in older people, over the age of 50.
It actually shows a decrease in cancer incidence rates over the past 20 years. Yes, more people die from cancer. For two major reasons; there are more people and they live longer.
Those downplaying this are pied pipers of doom.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: EternalShadow
Those downplaying this are pied pipers of doom.
And those who exaggerate it? What do you call them?
There is no question that Fukushima was a major nuclear disaster. There is no question that Chernobyl was a major nuclear disaster. There is no question that there have been other near nuclear disasters. There is no question that nuclear weapons testing increased "background" radiation levels. Reasonable people understand that. Reasonable people understand that nuclear power is a very dangerous tool. Reasonable and educated people understand that the Fukushima disaster does not mean the end of life as we know it but that there are lessons (crucial lessons) to be learned from it.
Can you provide evidence of this occurring?
So "reasonable" people keep raising acceptable levels of exposure,
This thread is an example of that not being the case. There are also independent researchers providing data on an ongoing basis.
people keep people in the dark as far as fair reporting and updates,
So "reasonable" people keep raising acceptable levels of exposure,
I haven't seen anything about raising any fish radiation limits but Japan did increase the amount of radiation schoolchildren were allowed to be exposed to by a factor of 20 at one point, to the same level recommended for nuclear plant workers, which resulted in the resignation of Toshiso Kosako in protest.
originally posted by: Phage
Can you provide evidence of this occurring?
In April, Japan's government caused anger when it raised the upper limit of safe radiation exposure for children from 1 millisievert a year to 20mSv a year, the same level the International Commission on Radiological Protection recommends for nuclear plant workers.
The decision prompted Toshiso Kosako, a Tokyo university professor, to tearfully announce his resignation as a government nuclear adviser, describing the revised upper limit as "intolerable".
I would suspect the latter because it's not going to be received well when limits are raised right after a disaster, as Japan learned.
Then, post Fukushima, the Japanese Japanese Ministry of Health decided to more than double the maximum allowable exposure for nuclear workers from 100 millisieverts to 250 millisieverts...
Now we have the US EPA significantly raising the allowable limits of radioactive contamination in America’s domestic drinking water (article below). Is this the result of the atmospheric contamination previously received in the US in the days after the Fukushima multiple reactor meltdown, or are the authorities taking a proactive step in preparing for the next nuclear disaster sure to come?
Ken Buesseler is a great source of actual information about the scope of the ocean water contamination problem. I don't know if he's behind the ourradioactiveocean.org site but he's quoted in it and he works at Woods Hole. Someone posted a great video by Ken last year and since he was talking about facts and not portraying it as doom porn it didn't seem to generate any interest here.
This thread is an example of that not being the case. There are also independent researchers providing data on an ongoing basis.
www.ourradioactiveocean.org...
kelpwatch.berkeley.edu...
The drinking water PAG is not binding and does not in any way affect regulatory requirements or enforcement of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), including maximum contaminant limits (MCLs) for radionuclides established by regulation under the SDWA.