Ionizing Radiation- They are lying to us.

We have soo many experts saying low doses of radiation are of no concern and some even say its good for you.

I don't know what science they are using to make these absurd claims of "nothing to worry about" but those most informed have another opinion.

Behold the Linear No-Threshold Model brought to us by;

The International Commission for Radiation Protection (ICRP)
The National Commission for Radiation Protection (NCRP)
The National Academy of Sciences Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (the BEIR Committee)

The Linear No-Threshold Model

These bodies conclude that, until further studies clarify the risk of cancer induction at low doses, it is prudent and conservative to use the linear no-threshold (LNT) model to estimate cancer risks.

Based on the known risk of cancer induction at high doses, the LNT model linearly extrapolates risks at low doses and assumes there is no threshold for cancer induction. Because we cannot prove there is no risk at very low doses, we conservatively assume that any amount of radiation, no matter how small, poses a cancer risk.

Radiation-Induced Cancer Risks

There is also the problem that some people are more sensitive to radiation due to their genetics and therefore the risks are far greater for them.

Howard Hughes Medical Institute researchers have identified a group of genes that influence a person’s sensitivity to radiation. The findings are a step toward a long-term goal of developing new tests that would help physicians determine the optimal dosage of radiation for cancer treatment based on a person’s genetic profile.

“This study identifies a set of genetic variants that influence how a cell responds to radiation-induced damage,” said Vivian G. Cheung, senior author of a report published on April 6, 2009, in the journal Nature.

Genetic Clues to Radiation Sensitivity

So knowing that some people are more susceptible to ionizing radiation than others, how can the media or any experts say there is no cause for alarm? Who knows if their one of the susceptible people?

Science doesn't fully understand the effects of low dose radiation so don't believe the experts claims, they are lying.

Be cautious people.

To answer your question, YES they are lying to us.

And Im way ahead of you.
I havent trusted TEPCO or the Japanese government or the MSM since the mess started.
And i will not trust them EVER

reply to post by meathed


So HOW can they get away with this?? If they really are lying, why aren`t other countries coming in and helping out to show how big the lie is?

Or maybe they know that the radiation that has spilled out so far is so big, that everyone will die in a very short span and that they cannot afford telling everyone to leave because of the mass panic and because, anyway, we have all been contaminated already??

Well, idk if this is legit, but think Iron Man 2.

He drank ridiculous amounts of alcohol to keep his radiation level down. Were the film makers trying to tell us something? It sounds crazy, i know.

So, im 21 and can drink anytime i like, but does it really work?

Originally posted by Sarahko
reply to post by meathed

 

So HOW can they get away with this?? If they really are lying, why aren`t other countries coming in and helping out to show how big the lie is?

Basically they get away with it because there is no way to determine if a cancer was caused naturally or un-naturally. The fact is we know that radiation causes cancer but we have not developed a method to distinguish the cause and when you add in the fact that some cancers don't develope for years after exposure it gets much more complicated.

As for why don't other countries don't say something, probably because they have nuc plants of their own and would never admit to their people the true dangers. Find one nuclear plant that does not have higher instances of cancer and birth defects in its surrounding population and I will eat my hat.

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker

Originally posted by Sarahko
reply to post by meathed

 

So HOW can they get away with this?? If they really are lying, why aren`t other countries coming in and helping out to show how big the lie is?

Basically they get away with it because there is no way to determine if a cancer was caused naturally or un-naturally. The fact is we know that radiation causes cancer but we have not developed a method to distinguish the cause and when you add in the fact that some cancers don't develope for years after exposure it gets much more complicated.


As for why don't other countries don't say something, probably because they have nuc plants of their own and would never admit to their people the true dangers. Find one nuclear plant that does not have higher instances of cancer and birth defects in its surrounding population and I will eat my hat.

So, if these radiations are really `high` and the governments know, but not letting us know...it means they are just watching and letting the whole Japanese population die... Could this be??

Though i dont believe weve recieved a fatal dose of ionizing radiation yet, the Goverment is at present raising the maximum dose standards...why at this time for petes sake?
The indications are that at least one of the reactors has exploded in a nuclear type explosion.
This must have scattered pieces of fuel rods, both hot and cold storage ones, all over the site.
If as claimed thisreactor has been ipen to the air with its lid off for the duration since the explosion, id say there is a good chance that much higher levels of radiation will be reached over the long term.
Multiply the situation by fourfold and we definately have been lied to.
There is no way they have come close to revealing the true hopelessness of the sitution at the site.
Tons of highly radioactive water has been leaked back into the ocean.
It is unknown at this time how much solid waste fuels rods have been compromised.
Though it looks to me that there is signifigantly greater damage than previously reported.
And the reactorsare all in varying stages of melting down.
If there was a way to isolate the site from the world it wuld be welcome news.
These exclusion zones and the efforts of tepco to get this under control is woefully inadequate.

Originally posted by Sarahko
reply to post by meathed


Q. So HOW can they get away with this??

A. I dont know, but this is what governments do and will continue to do, they lie to the people.

Q. If they really are lying, why aren`t other countries coming in and helping out to show how big the lie is?

A. Because we dont care. Its one less mouth to feed in the future. Its one less person buying the petrol that you want. I could go on.

Q.]Or maybe they know that the radiation that has spilled out so far is so big, that everyone will die in a very short span and that they cannot afford telling everyone to leave because of the mass panic and because, anyway, we have all been contaminated already??

A.Lots of people will die but it will take years for cancers to form. And by then legally anyone whom gets cancer from this wont be able to sue, as there will be no proof.

I think we are going to need Erin Brockovich to help on this one
.

What type of ionizing radiation are you referring to?
Some of it can't penetrate a piece of paper, some can't get from space to the Earth, and some can travel great distances but not react with much matter.

Hmm...
alpha cannot get through most clothing and is usually stopped in the top few cell layers of the epidermis
beta can penetrate about 1-2mm of flesh, a bit less if it has to pass through clothing; does most damage to humans by radioactive particles being inhaled or ingested.
x-ray and gamma can travel completely through the body without doing much damage unless exposure is for a long period or at high levels
ultraviolet, is a lot like beta; clothing is a strong inhibitor.

So... again...?

And remember that brick and metal construction, air trapped in your house, sunlight, air, food, and air are all radioactive to some varying degree.

It's even been shown that iodine-131, though radioactive and carcinogenic in low to moderate doses, is not carcenogenic in high doses since it kills nearby tissues before they can mutate.

From: jcem.endojournals.org...

The large scale epidemiological surveys of the CTSG involving 36,050 patients in the United States and the Swedish cohort studies have provided considerable information about the relative cancer risks after iodine-131 therapy. After treatment of Graves’ disease in adults with iodine-131, which exposes the thyroid gland to high levels of radiation, rates of thyroid cancer and thyroid cancer mortality were not increased.

Follow-up data involving children in the CTSG showed that thyroid adenomas developed in 30% of the patients treated in one center with low doses of iodine-131 (50 mCi/g) estimated to result in thyroid exposure of 2500 cGy (56, 88). Yet, in the other centers where children were treated with higher doses of iodine-131 (100–200 mCi/g), the incidence of thyroid neoplasms was not increased.

[emphasis added]

Originally posted by abecedarian
What type of ionizing radiation are you referring to?

Cesium 137 and iodine 131.

Originally posted by abecedarian
It's even been shown that iodine-131, though radioactive and carcinogenic in low to moderate doses, is not carcenogenic in high doses since it kills nearby tissues before they can mutate.

Don't forget the half life Iodine 131 is 8 days. If a area was heavily contaminated with it the levels would naturally fall and anyone living in that area would recieve a different dose every day.

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker

Originally posted by abecedarian
What type of ionizing radiation are you referring to?

Cesium 137 and iodine 131.

Those are radioactive elements, not ionizing radiation.
Please clarify.

Originally posted by abecedarian
It's even been shown that iodine-131, though radioactive and carcinogenic in low to moderate doses, is not carcenogenic in high doses since it kills nearby tissues before they can mutate.

Don't forget the half life Iodine 131 is 8 days. If a area was heavily contaminated with it the levels would naturally fall and anyone living in that area would recieve a different dose every day.

You mean every 8 days, right?
And as I mentioned above, the study shows that high doses are not carcinogenic. However, I assume it's safe to assume that some disruption of thyroid function would be a result, but likely non-fatal nor cancerous.

Originally posted by Sarahko
So, if these radiations are really `high` and the governments know, but not letting us know...it means they are just watching and letting the whole Japanese population die... Could this be??

I really don't believe they are evil enough to kill all Japan but if they can get away with not taking responsibility for the thousands of cases of cancer that are sure to develope, why would they? Just to be sued and made to pay for damages to health and land.

Look how the rest of the world kept quite and is still keeping quite about the effects of Chernobyl. The official deaths for the chernobyl accident are usually listed between 60 and 80.

Originally posted by abecedarian

Those are radioactive elements, not ionizing radiation.
Please clarify.

Sorry, should have just said any radiation from nuclear fission or fusion. But you know what I meant.

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker

Originally posted by abecedarian

Those are radioactive elements, not ionizing radiation.
Please clarify.

Sorry, should have just said any radiation from nuclear fission or fusion. But you know what I meant.

edit on 3-4-2011 by FreeSpeaker because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-4-2011 by FreeSpeaker because: (no reason given)

Well, no I don't as fission and fusion both can result in alpha, beta, gamma, neutron and some x-ray radiation all of which behave differently and have differing effects on the body.

Originally posted by abecedarian

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker

Originally posted by abecedarian

Those are radioactive elements, not ionizing radiation.
Please clarify.

Sorry, should have just said any radiation from nuclear fission or fusion. But you know what I meant.

edit on 3-4-2011 by FreeSpeaker because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-4-2011 by FreeSpeaker because: (no reason given)

Well, no I don't as fission and fusion both can result in alpha, beta, gamma, neutron and some x-ray radiation all of which behave differently and have differing effects on the body.

edit on 4/3/2011 by abecedarian because: (no reason given)

Without actually data from Japan its impossible to be so specific as to the types of radionuclides floating around.

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker

Originally posted by abecedarian

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker

Originally posted by abecedarian

Those are radioactive elements, not ionizing radiation.
Please clarify.

Sorry, should have just said any radiation from nuclear fission or fusion. But you know what I meant.

edit on 3-4-2011 by FreeSpeaker because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-4-2011 by FreeSpeaker because: (no reason given)

Well, no I don't as fission and fusion both can result in alpha, beta, gamma, neutron and some x-ray radiation all of which behave differently and have differing effects on the body.

edit on 4/3/2011 by abecedarian because: (no reason given)

Without actually data from Japan its impossible to be so specific as to the types of radionuclides floating around.

So you're saying there's nothing conclusive other than "something" is floating around...
... but we should be scared sh*tless because "something" is floating around...?

Including artificially produced nuclides, more than 3300 nuclides are known (including ~3000 radionuclides), including many more (> ~2400) that have decay half lives shorter than 60 minutes.

Originally posted by abecedarian

So you're saying there's nothing conclusive other than "something" is floating around...
... but we should be scared sh*tless because "something" is floating around...?

I think your being a little too specific here.

To be more specific, if thats what you want, it would be safe to assume neutron radiation. It is the most common cause of ionizing radiation from nuclear fission.

Nuclear reactors produce large quantities of ionizing radiation as a byproduct of fission during operation. In addition, they produce highly radioactive nuclear waste, which will emit ionizing radiation for thousands of years for some of the fission products. The safe disposal of this waste in a way that protects future generations from exposure to its radiation is currently imperfect, a highly controversial and arguably unsolved worldwide problem of this technology.

Radiation emissions from nuclear waste decrease extremely slowly. Waste from nuclear reactors is highly radioactive and has to be contained and stored safely for hundreds of thousands of years while this process occurs. While some sources indicate that radioactive emissions from nuclear power plants under normal conditions of operation are lower than radioactive emissions from coal-burning power producers,[7], dangerous amounts of radioactivity have been released during different nuclear accidents. Radioactive waste does not contain the same toxic substances found in the waste byproducts from fossil-fueled generators, but plutonium, which is produced in nuclear reactors, is also a powerful chemical poison.

Ionizing radiation

Do you doubt there is radiation being spread from the Japan disaster?

I never said to be scared, I said don't believe the experts assurances of "nothing to worry about".

Let's see If I understand half life particularly that of iodine 131. After 8 days half of it decays to something else. What does it decay to? And after a further 8 days half of what's left also decays and so on till there is an infitessimal amount left.

So if this reactor disaster continues to spew this material during that 8 days then the decayed amount will be replaced and maybe even increased if a larger amount were to be released during that time. I have to ask who did, and who funded that study that shows that larger amounts aren't harmful because they kill the tissue before it can mutate. How can killing tissue not be harmful to an organism? What exactly am I missing here?

Even if the iodine 131 could be proved to be non hazardous as far as cancer is concerned, What about the tissue damage that is caused?

Now it seems to me that they admitted early on that there was iodine131 being released almost from the beginning did I miss the report that said that it had been stopped being released.

Now I may not be the brightest bulb in the string but this seems to make the half life question irrelevant. If the stuff has been continually ejected since the original disaster just how much is left undecayed and how much has been added over the interval of time since the original release?

Very pleased you posted this! It is postulated that our very natural environment, radiologically-speaking, is killing us.

I agree entirely with your post.

One thing that is very evident (especially in the last couple of days in the UK) is that the MSM are *NOT* a reliable source of information at the best of times, and as I noticed in the last couple of days, they haven't even mentioned it (interestingly things are mentioned on the UK version of the BBC World Service, but it would be prudent to note that it is not as prolific as the TV news outlets and can only be heard online during the day or selected BBC radio stations at night when most people are asleep).

Thank you! I have been looking for a link like this.