Medical Journal - 14,000 deaths in US tied to Fukushima! = More To Come!

We need to remember that everyone, and every life form, is different.

Some can handle more radiation than others. Some may die, while others are sickened.
People like myself who have already had over 150 x-rays in my life and 3 CT scans may not be able to handle being exposed to as much radiation contaminated air/food/water/rain as others.
How do you think those who are undergoing chemotherapy will handle the effects of this?

Everyone's different and will be affected differently. This is for sure.

Follow Uphill's link to the thread about kelp. (Uphill, thanks for adding this info. )
If you don't, you may be sorry you didn't.

I don't understand why people get in such a twist over radiation but not smoking. Japan has amongst the highest smoking prevalence in the world. 47% of Japanese men and 15% of Japanese women smoke, ~20% of smokers die from cancer caused by smoking. So just under 10% of the Japanese population will die from cancer caused by smoking.

If you want to save lives, send them nicotine patches!

Sooooooo.....
What is the radioactive half life of whatever is being spewed from the plant? I mean, this isn't a 1000 year issue is it? On that note, how long is Chernobyl dangerous for?!

Originally posted by Hr2burn
Sooooooo.....
What is the radioactive half life of whatever is being spewed from the plant? I mean, this isn't a 1000 year issue is it? On that note, how long is Chernobyl dangerous for?!

Well the half life of the Earth's radioactivity is 4.5 billion years for Uranium-238, 250,000 years for Uranium-235, 1.9 billion years for Potassium-40 and 14 billion years for Thorium-232. Also, cosmic rays will be around for ever.

The current exposure to people via air at the 20 km boundary, due to Fukushima Daiichi, is 0.1 mSv/year (about 1/30th of natural radiation). People before the accident got 3.9 mSv/year on average in Japan. So the levels are now much lower then the background.

IAEA Updates

The bulk of the radiation exposure is due to fission products and their daughter isotopes. Things like Iodine-131, Cesium-137 and so on.

Here's a graph of Chernobyl:

upload.wikimedia.org...

Cesium-137 has a half life of 30 years.

Uranium and Plutonium are comparatively harmless.

reply to post by soficrow

Arsenic occurs naturally - doesn't mean it's not deadly in the right concentration, in the right p[lace at the right time.

Yes... and Water occurs naturally also, doens't mean that it's not deadly in the right concentration, in the right place.

Also, Lightning occurs naturally, as do Tornado's, Hurricanes, Volcano's, Magma, Spiders, Tigers, Bears, Lions, Wolves, Snakes, Jellyfish, and the dreaded FUGU!

Doesn't mean that these things aren't dangerous in the right concentrations, in the right place.


People are too scared of radiation, for it being a completely natural thing.

Also, they don't understand it enough to realize that they are more scared than it's actual threat would indicate.


A knife can kill you.... but we don't go into full on PANIC mode every time someone mentions a knife, do we?

That's because we UNDERSTAND the knife, and the actual danger that it represents, and the mechanism that it does damage to us, under what conditions this occurs... and thus, we do not have an irrational fear of knives.

reply to post by ErtaiNaGia

A knife can kill you.... but we don't go into full on PANIC mode every time someone mentions a knife, do we?

No. Just box cutters.

reply to post by ErtaiNaGia


You are using legalistic adversarial arguments. Even "naturally occurring" radon gas is a health hazard in many areas. The fact is that radiation release by damaged reactors is and remains a problem. The fact is, atmospheric winds can pick up radioactive particles, carry them around the world and dump them here and there in a variety of concentrations. These particles can be picked up again in the "grasshopper effect," and moved around again.

Industry routinely collects "naturally occurring" health hazards like arsenic, and concentrates them at levels, and in places, 'nature' never did. Often upstream from some village or another. But when people start getting sick, the defense is, "it's a naturally occurring" toxin, or carcinogen, or mutagen.

Industry routinely creates and disperses synthetic chemicals and bio-materials - but when health problems occur, the legal defense demands absolute proof of single-cause-single effect.

It's a legal game - not truth. Certainly not the kind of truth intended to protect public health.

reply to post by Afterthought

No. Just box cutters.

Clever....

reply to post by soficrow

You are using legalistic adversarial arguments.

No, I am using the exact same argument that YOU used.

Even "naturally occurring" radon gas is a health hazard in many areas.

IT really depends upon the concentration, doesn't it?

The fact is that radiation release by damaged reactors is and remains a problem.

It really depends upon the concentration, the distance from the release, and the type of radioisotope released, doesn't it?

The fact is, atmospheric winds can pick up radioactive particles, carry them around the world and dump them here and there in a variety of concentrations.

Yes.... a Variety of concentrations that can never be as high as their initial concentrations.

You are forgetting the effects of dispersion on concentrations of radioisotopes, and how dispersion limits their effects.

These particles can be picked up again in the "grasshopper effect," and moved around again.

Yes, and each time, their concentrations are diminished, until they are indistinguishable from background radiation.

Industry routinely collects "naturally occurring" health hazards like arsenic, and concentrates them at levels, and in places, 'nature' never did.

Are you insinuating that the Wind, and Oceanic currents "CONCENTRATES" radioisotopes, instead of dispersing them?

But when people start getting sick, the defense is, "it's a naturally occurring" toxin, or carcinogen, or mutagen.

Your analogy is quite.... Lame.

Industry routinely creates and disperses synthetic chemicals and bio-materials - but when health problems occur, the legal defense demands absolute proof of single-cause-single effect.

I should hope so.

Unless you want Legal Actions to be justified by hearsay?

It's a legal game - not truth.

Oh? How's that?

Are you suggesting that the purpose of Evidence is not to establish the truth?

Certainly not the kind of truth intended to protect public health.

Your analogies, again, are sort of lame... I would stick to talking about the topic at hand, instead of making false analogies of it.

I posted this Pic already today in our huge Thread,
please have a look to compare F"Shima and Chernobyl:


This is a accurate Pic from a Switzerland Insitute (ENSI):
Original Source

The whole Study is not scientifically steady on the Legs!

Imo. the amount of "14.000 Deaths" is underestimated,
we cant see so far in to the Future to calculate a close Number!

Originally posted by Human0815

The whole Study is not scientifically steady on the Legs!

Imo. the amount of "14.000 Deaths" is underestimated,
we cant see so far in to the Future to calculate a close Number!

do you see any irony in you saying a study is not "scientifically steady", and then saying that you think the number is underestimated with only your opinion to support that idea??

Because I do.

reply to post by quedup


Looks like Joseph Mangano and Janette Sherman were having a little bit of "fun" with the statistics.



Amazing what you can make people infer when you crop data and play with axis scales.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by Human0815

The whole Study is not scientifically steady on the Legs!

Imo. the amount of "14.000 Deaths" is underestimated,
we cant see so far in to the Future to calculate a close Number!

do you see any irony in you saying a study is not "scientifically steady", and then saying that you think the number is underestimated with only your opinion to support that idea??

Because I do.

Because maybe you are an Ignorant

1. i am not the Science Magazine
2. i wrote "imo" this means "in my Opinion"
3. i hope this is helpful for you
4. Happy Christmas

Sea salt and baking soda, best all natural remedy for curing radiation exposure and cancer

If you have been exposed to any form of radiation, either for medical diagnostic purposes (fluoroscopy/mammography/other medical x-ray exams) or in the course of radiotherapy treatment, or if you are otherwise concerned by excessive radiation exposure, overload or poisoning (such as living near a nuclear reactor facility, working with diagnostic radiological equipment/in the nuclear processing industries/uranium mining/uranium or plutonium processing), or if you have been exposed to radioactive particles or higher ionizing radiation doses stemming from other sources such as depleted uranium (DU), testing of atomic weapons, frequent flights in higher altitudes, a nuclear disaster (radiation fallout from the Japan nuclear power plants) etc., here are a number of tips and suggested remedies how to naturally help your body excrete damaging radioactive elements (e.g. strontium and radioactive iodine) or detoxify their noxious byproducts such as free radicals as well as deal with radiation burns.

If you are having any kind of radiation treatments, macrobiotic is the cure. Macrobiotics is very effective in curing radiation sickness and cancer.

If you are diagnosed with cancer and you want to survive the cancer avoid any and all exposure to radiation treatment. Radiation treatment of any kind is what actually kills people diagnosed with cancer. Exposure to radiation causes a cascade of free radicals that wreak havoc on the body. Free radicals damages DNA, protein, and fats. Free radical damage has been clinically proven to be a major contributor to cancer. That being said, people don’t die of cancer, they die of radiation poisoning. The repeated exposure to radiation through so-called treatment overwhelms the body’s immune system. Cancer doesn’t cause hair loss for cancer patients, the radiation treatment is solely responsible for that. Cancer doesn’t cause weight loss, the radiation treatment causes that because it suppresses your appetite. Cancer doesn’t cause a cancer patient to become very weak and sick, the radiation treatment poisons the body and makes them very weak and sick.

According to Michio and Aveline Kushi, in his book Macrobiotic Diet, Michio Kushi states: ‘At the time of the atomic bombing of Nagasaki in 1945, Tatsuichiro Akizuki, M.D., was director of the Department of Internal Medicine at St. Francis Hospital in Nagasaki. Most patients in the hospital, located one mile from the center of the blast, survived the initial effects of the bomb, but soon after came down with symptoms of radiation sickness from the radioactivity that had been released. Dr. Akizuki fed his staff and patients a strict macrobiotic diet of brown rice, miso* and tamari soy sauce soup, wakame and other sea vegetables, Hokkaido pumpkin, and sea salt and prohibited the consumption of sugar and sweets. As a result, he saved everyone in his hospital, while many other survivors in the city perished from radiation sickness.’”

In case you missed it the secret to surviving all forms of radiation exposure is sea salt. If you are concerned about the radiation fallout from the Japan nuclear plants disaster or if you had an X-ray (from hospitals and airport screening) or radiation treatments for cancer, soak your body in sea salt (not iodized table salt) baths to help pull out the radiation from your body.

If you were diagnosed with mouth or throat cancer and you were subjected to deadly radiation treatments gargling with baking soda mixed in water will help neutralize the radiation.

Baking soda is so powerful in curing radiation contamination that at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, researcher Don York has used baking soda to clean soil contaminated with uranium. Sodium bicarbonate binds with uranium, separating it from the dirt; so far, York has removed as much as 92 percent of the uranium from contaminated soil samples. Still not convinced? Would it help to know that the United States Army recommends the use of baking soda to protect the kidneys from radiation damage. Radiation is very toxic. Exposure to radiation of any amount is harmful to your body. Exposure to radiation through x-rays (hospitals and airport screening) or any of the so-called cancer treatments are the most dangerous source of radiation poisoning. X-rays and radiation cancer treatments are far deadlier than radiation fallout because the exposure is concentrated and frequent. To pull the radiation poison out of the body, try bathing in half a cup of sea salt and half a cup of baking soda. Soak for at least 20-30 minutes, every day for three weeks or every other day for six weeks. . . or go on a vacation to the West Indies or South Pacific and swim in the ocean every day for three weeks! Why the Indies or South Pacific? Because of the higher concentration of sea salt. Where is the best place on Earth to go for curing yourself of radiation? The Dead Sea. Can’t afford to travel to the Dead Sea and cure yourself of the radiation poison from nuclear plant fallout, x-rays and radiation cancer treatment? A tiny pinch of good quality sea salt in several glasses of distilled water each day will provide one with all the minerals and trace elements you need to rid your body of the radiation and stay healthy.

Can’t stomach sea salt? The amino acid, cysteine also protects against the damaging effects of radiation by terminating the free radicals produced by ionizing radiation. Cysteine, together with methionine, cystine, and their derivatives, is numbered among the “sulphurated amino acids” due to the fact that these amino acids contain sulfur in addition to carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen and oxygen.

reply to post by Phage


I became suspicious mainly due to the source.

But damn, what's with all the fear-mongering on Fukushima? Is it really that much of a slow news day?

I just saw the main stream media pick this story up! At about 6:24 a.m. est I was watching the weather channel. Alex Witt from MSNBC came on to give a headline update. There was a huge red and black headline banner at the bottom of the tv screen - carrying the information headline from this story. Alex Witt then proceeded to say it out loud.
The main stream media actually said this out loud. Wish I could have done a screen capture. But I was so stunned that this info was finally on the tube for the sheeple to see - that I couldn't move.
anyone out there get a screen capture of the headline??
If MSM is willing to tell us this much . . . what is the real truth indeed?