Cesium-137 In Vermont Milk

Radiation from Japan has been detected in drinking water in 13 more American cities, and for the first time cesium-137 has been found in American milk—in Montpelier, Vermont, according to data released by the Environmental Protection Agency late Friday. The sample contained 1.9 picoCuries per liter of cesium-137, which is under EPA’s 3.0 picoCuries per liter standard.

Cesium-137 has a half-life of 30 years'

According to the National Academy of Sciences, there are no safe doses of radiation. Decades of research show clearly that any dose of radiation increases an individual’s risk for the development of cancer.


Current EPA Rainwater & Milk Radiation Data

RADIATION, MILK & IODINE

reply to post by webworker


Although this is slightly frightening...stay calm.

It's NOTHING compared to the amount of radiation found in smoking: www.abovetopsecret.com...

If you really want to take extra precautions..I'll suggest not to consume milk for now

reply to post by BlackPoison94

You should have read the articles linked above before making your statement. There is no alarm here or on that site. Only facts such as:

“There is no safe level of radionuclide exposure, whether from food, water or other sources. Period,” said Jeff Patterson, DO, immediate past president of Physicians for Social Responsibility. “Exposure to radionuclides, such as iodine-131 and cesium-137, increases the incidence of cancer. For this reason, every effort must be taken to minimize the radionuclide content in food and water.”

reply to post by webworker


Of course, but many members here will jump to scaremonger upon this fact.

But it's true...the more food you consume containing these deadly isotopes, the more it will build up...and then it is indeed needed for a massive alarm.

If the government tries to limit this right now, it could be saving itself from a lot of potential deaths or mutations within the body.

reply to post by BlackPoison94


Ah yes, but what if you smoke home grown tobacco?

Listen people, take some time and research cancer rates in humans.
I believe its 1 in 3 males get some form of cancer in their lives.
1 in 5 females.

So no worries!

You're going to die regardless if you eat healthy, exercise or smoke.
Enjoy life while you are here!

Just remember one key thing: Moderation.
Might let ya live an extra year or two.

reply to post by havok


Yeah that's true indeed. Moderation is quite a big factor.
Apparently, I heard that if you moderate yourself on alcohol...it actually is advantageous!

No matter what, we're going to die...so..enjoy yourself people Haha.

When it comes down to it, the people who are extra precautionary will live about 10 minutes longer in the end.
Before Fukushima we were all getting a couple CT scans worth per year, now we're getting about a dozen or so per year. It will break us down faster and that's great for the people who already spent most of our social security money.

reply to post by webworker



Hmm. Well......How about you post a link directly to the scientific source as the CDC or EPA. Your links go to some "other" website that shows this data but how do you know that its legit? For all you know they made up that data themselves. Why not link directly to the EPA, FDA or CDC websites that show the data?

For instance, on another thread here they were talking about the levels of radiation here in B.C. being over toxic levels yet no one posted info from the official scientific sources of the data. I could post a link to some outside source but how legit would it be? or I could (which I did) go to the source of the original scientific data.

Health Canada Fixed Point Network

National Resources Mobile Data

Im not trying to knock your post.....I just think that when you are going to make a claim, post links to the original scientific source. Not to an independant website with links to something that cannot be verified as truly coming from the EPA, FDA or CDC

reply to post by BlackPoison94



But are they segregating the milk. According to the FDA:

Normal food production and processing procedures that could reduce the amount of radioactive contamination in or on the food could be simple, (such as holding to allow for radioactive decay, or removal of surface contamination by brushing, washing, or peeling) or could be complex. The blending of contaminated food with uncontaminated food is not permitted because this is a violation of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDA 1991).”

reply to post by QBSneak000


If you look further on that site you will see those links in an article entitled Fukushima Toolkit

AND if you click on the links in the original post the rainwater and milk links in the article are obviously the EPA RadNet data tables.

AND if you look on the site where all of the information links reside, "Pstuph", you will see that the tone and content is factual. If you can point out sensationalism or shoddy fact-finding on the site - email or comment on that site and your concerns will be specifically addressed

Keep in mind that the reactors are still spewing these elements into the environment and they will continue to build up over time. it's gonna get worse before it gets better.

nice! they now need to use geiger counters when milk is being prodcued and bottled! wow!
i got an idea.ide argue the price of milk now, try n get the costs down...since its contaminated* its not worth the $349 a gallon. same should go for property taxes too now. its noth worth the money, since its THIER system that caused this all.

I just wanted to take a minute to say something about the Iodine and Cesium being found in milk. This is going to apply more to the northerly states (Vermont) Very few dairy cows are going to be on pasture at this time of year they will be being feed crops harvested during the last growing season. The vast majority of this feed will have been kept covered since harvest with the express purpose of preventing precipitation from coming into contact with the feed.
The dairy cattle's water supply will have been a well plumbed to a water tank most likely also covered. Dairy cattle are not normally allowed to drink from rivers or other sources of ground water as their many hooves quickly churn the ground to mud and their udders are prone to infection.
For the most part dairy cattle currently producing milk will always have their feed brought to them and those you may see on pasture are either younger stock or in the later stage of pregnancy during which they are not milked.
Dairy Cattle eat Corn, Alfalfa (Hay) and a little soybeans as a supplement. The first feed the would be eating grown this year would be right after 1st cutting of Alfalfa in your area (often right after corn is planted).
I'm not sure exactly what this means but I am sure that a dairy cow in Vermont is not going to be out on pasture eating great quantities of grass that has been dusted with fallout because the grass isn't there right now and the Dairy Cows mostly never are.

The article doesn't say WHICH dairies have found this problem.

This isn't helpful. I live 45 mins from Montpelier.

Humans should not be drinking cow's milk anyway. Cow's milk is for baby cows.

Originally posted by The Sword
The article doesn't say WHICH dairies have found this problem.

This isn't helpful. I live 45 mins from Montpelier.

I'm fairly certain the EPA isn't releasing the sources of the particular milk samples, likely to prevent people from panicking and causing problems for any particular dairy. My guess is that none of that information will be released until the levels exceed FDA limits and sales of said milk is restricted.

These levels are hardly going to do anything to you. We're talking picocuries per liter - basically nothing for all intents and purposes.