Blog

Yuliyan Velchev/Shutterstock

Fukushima's Legacy: Understanding the Difference Between Nuclear Radiation & Contamination

It's very important
Tuesday, February 11, 2014, 9:55 AM

Are fish from the Pacific safe to eat?  What about the elevated background radiation readings detected in Japan, and recently, in California? Are these harmful levels?

Should we be worried? And if so, what should be done about these potential health threats? What steps should we take to protect ourselves?

As many of you know, I'm a scientist by training. In this report, I'll lay out the facts and data that explain the actual risks. I'll start by pointing out that Fukushima-related fears have been overblown as well as heavily downplayed by parties on each side of the discussion.

Much of this stems from ignorance of the underlying science. But some of it, sadly, seems to be purposefully misleading. Again, on both sides.

To assess the true risks accurately, you need to know about the difference between radiation and contamination. The distinction is vital, and, unfortunately, one of the most glossed-over and misused facets of the reporting on nuclear energy.

Starting with the Bottom Line

All of my research and understanding of the risks of radiation at this point indicate that people living on the West Coast of the U.S. or in Hawaii are currently not in danger from the radiation released in the wake of the Fukushima tragedy. 

While the background levels are elevated somewhat, those detected so far remain well within what I consider to be a safe zone. However, should there be another accident at the damaged facility leading to the release of another large plume of radioactive matter, then this assessment could, understandably, change.

The exception to this assessment is for those living within a hundred kilometers of Fukushima. For those people, my analysis points to serious risks, especially for those living with a kilometer or two of the coast, extending 100 kilometers in either direction. The details behind my assessment are contained in the full report below.

The intent of this report is to help readers understand the likely implications of the Fukushima situation with more clarity, as well as to provide a useful framework for identifying the risks posed by any future nuclear incidents and what your response to them should be.

The most important takeaway from this analysis should be this: Radiation, itself, is less a threat than most people imagine. But radioactive contamination is an entirely different and far more dangerous beast. 

While both deliver a ‘dose’ of radiation, it's contamination especially ingested contamination that has the greatest odds of delivering a concentrated dose to human tissue in a way that can lead to serious acute and/or chronic damage.

The difference between these two will be explained in detail. For those who chose not to read the full report and just want the punchline, it's this: Contamination is the process of acquiring radioactive particles that then become lodged on, or more dangerously in, your body. Do all you can to protect yourself against it.

Should you find yourself nearby during a nuclear accident, your first order of business is to avoid breathing or ingesting any contaminated particulate matter. This usually involves sheltering in place and is when duct tape and plastic sheeting become your best friends. While it may sound silly to use such a dime-store defense against a nuclear hazard, it is in fact both remarkably effective and entirely necessary. Merely keeping you and your family away from the fallout for a matter of 2-3 days, possibly a bit longer depending on conditions, can make an enormous difference in your survival odds. 

For now, the levels of radiation that have been detected and reported outside of Japan are between two and three orders of magnitude below what I would personally consider to be worrisome. And there’s no concrete evidence that the bigger concern, contamination, has traveled to countries outside of Japan.

And within Japan, the story takes on its own complexity (just as happened in the areas surrounding Chernobyl), where local wind patterns in the days after the accident created a complex quilt of danger and (relative) safety.  

For those who wish to engage with the context and details of the post-Fukushima world, the journey begins by understanding what ‘radiation’ actually is. 

Radiation Types

What do we mean when we say 'radiation'?  As it turns out, that word can mean any number of things. 

You are bathed in radiation every day: from sunlight, radio waves, wi-fi, etc. Some radiation is electromagnetic (in the case of light), and some is composed of particles (matter).

When we hear about ‘radiation’ in the press, what’s typically being referred to are potentially harmful forms of energetic emissions, both electromagnetic and particulate, that can damage biological organisms.

The main distinction between harmful and benign radiation lies in the ability of the radioactive wave or particle to ionize a molecule in your body. Technically, 'ionizing' means "to create an ion," which involves forcibly stripping an electron off a molecule or atom. This leaves the molecule or atom in a charged state (referred to as 'ionic form'), which thus can cause the affected particle to break apart or otherwise not work as it did before. 

For example, the hemoglobin in your blood is a very complex molecule. Breaking even one of its internal bonds can completely destroy its ability to carry oxygen.  

Every cell in your body is an enormously complex machine with thousands of different molecules each with a crucial function. Wreck enough of these molecules through the process of ionization and the cell dies. Destroy or disrupt the DNA at the center of the cell, and malfunction will result, one dramatic form being the loss of the ability to self-regulate its growth, which we call cancer. 

Radioactive substances emit various forms of energy. Some of the energetic releases are in the form of photon waves (such as gamma or X-rays) while some are in the form of actual fast-moving particles (such as alpha and beta particles, and neutrons).

We lump them all together and call them ‘radiation’. But when it comes to their impact on living organisms, not all forms of radiation are created equally. Some are far more effective 'disrupters of life' than others.

The basic types of radiation you would encounter as a consequence of a nuclear accident like Fukushima are:

  • Alpha particles.  These are fast moving nuclei of helium, meaning that they consist of two protons and two neutrons.  The electron shell is missing, so these are charged particles in search of electrons to strip from some other hapless molecule or atom. In the subatomic world, these are very large particles and so are the most easily stopped. They cannot penetrate even a single sheet of paper or the layer of dead skin cells on the outside of your body. As a result, they are quite easy to protect against with minimal effort. However, we shouldn't take total comfort in this fact. The deadly toxin polonium-210, the one used to kill various enemies of the Russians over the years, emits alpha particles and is quite effective as a poison. The reason for this lies in the fact that, once ingested, it works its damage in close proximity to a person's cells. On the outside of a body, alpha particles bump into already-dead skin cells, so no harmful damage results. On the inside, they careen straight into living cells and are quite damaging.
  • Beta particles.  These are electrons that have been ejected through a radioactive decay process (technically, it's when a neutron decays, yielding both a proton and an electron). Beta radiation can penetrate a sheet of paper easily, and it requires something along the lines of an aluminum plate a few millimeters thick to stop it. Beta particles have medium ionizing power and medium penetrating power, but there is a very wide spectrum of potential power intensities, depending on exactly which radioactive substance is emitting the beta particle. One very common radioactive substance found in nuclear plants, tritium, is a beta emitter.
  • Gamma rays.  These are high-energy photons with strong penetrating power and high ionizing potential.  In the past, they were distinguished from x-rays on the basis of their energy potential, but they are really the same thing (they are both high-energy photons). Although, what we call an x-ray generally carries a lot less energy than a gamma ray. That is, an x-ray is at the low end of the energetic spectrum, while a gamma ray is at the higher end. This is exactly analogous to the difference between visible sunlight and UV rays, which are the radiation (composed of high-energy photons) that burns your skin. Just place gamma rays a lot further along that same spectrum all the way at the point where, instead of being stopped by your underlay of skin, the gamma rays can create an equivalent ‘sunburn’ on tissues all the way through your body. Gamma rays vary in strength and actually occupy a spectrum of energies (not unlike how white light includes the spectrum of all the colors of the rainbow), so we need to know more about the specific gamma rays in question to know how damaging they might be. 
  • Neutrons.  Neutrons are the bad boys of the radiation story, and are only found as a consequence of a nuclear reaction (controlled or uncontrolled). Their penetrating power is extraordinary, requiring several meters of solid substance to stop them. They work their harm by indirect ionization, which is not unlike a pool ball smashing into a lamp. A typical example would be the capture of a neutron by a hydrogen nucleus consisting of a single proton, which is then ripped away from its position by the kinetic energy contained by the neutron, and then, like our billiard ball, careens about breaking things, ionizing some atoms/molecules, or shattering the bonds between atoms. In terms of biological damage, neutrons are horrific roughly ten times more damaging than beta or gamma radiation on a per-unit-of-energy basis.

Of course, there's a lot of complexity buried within each of these 'buckets' of radiation types, especially given the uncertainty that each bucket has a range of energies associated with it. 

To help clarify this, imagine that we're talking about radiation as if it were vehicles traveling on a highway. It's not really possible to predict how destructive it would be to collide with 'a vehicle,' because that answer depends on knowing factors like the vehicle’s size, weight, and speed.

Bumping into a small car traveling slowly in your same direction will be far less damaging than slamming head-on into a large fully-loaded Mack truck going 80 mph.

The way this is technically measured is by the energy that each type of radiation carries, measured in units called 'electron volts' (eV). Think of the eV rating as combining both the speed and the mass of the vehicle we are trying to rank. 

To the eV designation, we'll add the scientific shorthand of K for 'kilo' signifying 1,000 and M for Mega signifying 1,000,000. So 1 KeV = 1,000 eV, and 1 MeV = 1,000,000 eV

Along our radiation 'highway,' we find that x-rays carry the least energy and are in the vicinity of 1.2 KeV. They are small, light cars. Think Fiat.

Gamma rays are not a single vehicle type, because they can have energies anywhere from a few KeV all the way up to 25 MeV. They are everything and anything from tiny TR-6s to massive, fully loaded, Peterbilt double trailer trucks traveling 80 mph. For reference, the gamma rays emitted by cesium-137, a very common byproduct of nuclear reactors and a main component of the Fukushima releases, is 700 KeV, hundreds of times more energetic than your typical dentist x-ray, but not nearly the most potent gamma ray you could encounter.

Some common gamma emitters are cesium-137, cobalt-60 and technetium-99. Also, about 10% of the radioactivity of iodine-131 is gamma, the rest is beta (making this is a mixed radioelement).

Alpha particles have very high kinetic energies standing at about 5 MeV. However, they have exceptionally poor penetrating power, so we might think of them as very large steamrollers that can lurch forwards violently, but only for a few feet. If you are right next to it, you're in big trouble, but otherwise you're safe.

In recent years, a potent alpha emitter, polonium-210, was used to assassinate both Yasser Arafat and Russian critic Alexander Litvinenko. Because polonium-210 only emits alpha particles, you could carry it in a glass vial in your pocket and slip though radiation detectors at any facility because none of the alpha particles would make it through the vial wall (and even if they somehow did, they’d be stopped by the fabric of your pants pocket). In fact, you could merrily rub it on your skin and suffer no ill effects. 

But if ingested? Just a few milligrams, a speck the size of a small grain of salt, would be sufficient to kill. All those gigantic lurching steamrollers would be positioned right next to your living cells, crashing into them and destroying your tissues one cell at a time.

Common alpha emitters include radium, radon, polonium, uranium, and thorium.

Beta particles are electrons ejected during proton decay, and they travel at high speed. They can range anywhere between 5 KeV and 20 MeV. For our purposes, the isotopes most commonly associated with nuclear reactions are in the range of 19 KeV (tritium) to 600 KeV (iodine-131 and strontium-90) to 2.3 MeV (yttrium-90). So these range from medium-sized cars to tractor-trailers, in our analogy.

Beta particles have medium penetrating power and they can easily get through your skin to the living tissues beneath. Think of them as being able to give you a very harsh sunburn from the outside inwards if you were exposed long enough. Again, their worst effects come if ingested, where they can cause lots of damage.

Some common beta emitters are strontium-90, yttrium-90, iodine-131, carbon-14, and tritium.

Neutrons are a very wide topic, so we'll just talk about them in terms of a nuclear reactor. The moderate to fast neutrons emitted as a product of fission are extraordinarily dangerous and can penetrate lead shields and many meters of concrete. They are most readily stopped by interacting with hydrogen, so water and wax (and human bodies) which contain lots of hydrogen atoms are better at stopping neutrons than concrete. 

Neutrons are not part of the radioactive release from Fukushima. They really aren't ever an issue unless you somehow find yourself near an open, uncontained source of fission like inside the containment shell of an operating reactor, or in the vicinity of an exploding nuclear bomb. Then neutrons are a BIG problem.

Of note: In the early stages of the Fukushima meltdown, neutron 'beams' were detected 13 times from outside the reactors. This understandably caused the TEPCO workers a lot of worry and slowed their response efforts. This was a certain indication that there was spontaneous fission happening outside of a sealed containment vessel, something that TEPCO was busily assuring the world had not happened. They were still claiming that the vessels were intact and full of pumped cooling water. 

The bottom line is that the topic of radioactivity is complex. If we want to make intelligent decisions, then we need to know which type of radiation we are talking about. 

For example, there are folks walking about with mail-order radiation detectors and reporting ‘counts per minute’ readings. But counts of what, exactly?  Is each ‘count’ a low-energy beta particle or a high-energy gamma ray? There’s a world of difference between the two.

So we owe it to ourselves to dig into the context before coming to conclusions. To determine how concerned we should be about any new data, we have to translate ‘counts’ of any particle into their potential health effects. 

Radiation's Effect on Our Health

Okay, here's the thing most people don't know about radiation: We are surrounded by it and have evolved with it over billions of years. The body can deal with exposure to a certain amount of ionizing radiation without any difficulty at all. Naturally occurring radioactive elements, such as uranium and radon and carbon-14, have been a part of life since the very beginning. Gamma rays rain down from the celestial heavens every day.

So radiation alone is not a cause for concern for me. Even temporary radiation levels that are significantly above my normal background baseline, as much as ten or twenty times, are not a concern of mine as a healthy adult.

But as our vehicle analogy above showed, first we have to know what kind of radiation we are talking about. Is it alpha, beta, or gamma? How much energy is it carrying?

We also need to know about the person being exposed to the radiation. Tolerance levels for what's "safe" will be lower for kids, the old, and the frail.

For these reasons, science has struggled to come up with a universal measurement for the health impact caused by radiation. As a result, we have several different measurement methodologies parked into a few slightly different, but essentially related, scales. Each attempts to combine the acute effects of radiation exposure into a single 'dose' that is a measure of both the intensity and the duration of the exposure.

As mentioned previously, some radiation has the ability to travel right through our bodies entirely without being absorbed. So, the ‘dose’ reading needs to focus on the amount of any specific radiation type that will be absorbed (or stopped) by the body and thereby have opportunity to impact the molecules in that body.

The radiation absorbed dose is measured in Gray, rad, rem, and Sievert

Rads and Grays are related to each other. One Gray is a huge dose, and the rad just breaks the Grays down into finer units. One Gray = 100 rads (rad stands for Radiation Absorbed Dose). These measure the amount of energy that ionizing radiation imparts to matter.  This matter could be anything: a block of cement, or a human.  

Sieverts and rems are likewise related. One Sievert = 100 rems, but these are adjusted to provide a measure of the impact of the absorbed dose of ionizing radiation on biological tissue. To equate the two systems, the absorbed dose in Grays or rads is multiplied by a 'quality factor' that is specific to each type of radiation to account for their different biological impacts: the result is Sieverts or rems.  Thus, using our vehicle analogy from before, our small sedans get an adjustment factor of 1, while heavier vehicles get an adjustment factor as high as 10-20 times greater. 

(Source)

Based on this table, it's no wonder that polonium-210 is such a devastating radiological poison, because alpha particle get an adjustment factor of 20 (!), making them twice as deadly as fast neutrons, even. But, again, the alpha particles have to be ingested to have that impact, whereas neutrons can travel through ten feet of concrete and still be dangerous.

Keep in mind this table is a huge simplification of a very complicated field of study. For example, it also matters which tissues are being exposed, as they have very different sensitivities to radiation. 

However, if we are talking about an episode of external exposure to radiation, like a worker at Fukushima might get, then we care about the Sievert or rem scale:

  • 1 Sievert (or 1 Sv), or 100 rem, will induce nausea and reduce the white blood cell count
  • 5 Sv, or 500 rems, would cause death for 50% of those exposed in a matter of months
  • 10 Sv, or 1,000 rems, is 100% fatal within weeks

The above table leaves out the element of time, so if you are standing near a source of ionizing radiation that is hitting you at the rate of 1 SV per hour, after ten hours you will have received 10 Sv, a fatal dose.  If you stand next to that source for an hour you will get nauseous, and destroy some of your white blood cells.  If you only stand there for ten minutes, you'll receive something like 100 mS (the maximum yearly allowed dose for U.S. nuclear workers) and likely not feel any adverse effects.

Thus, dose is a function of intensity and time. You may recall seeing the grainy footage of Chernobyl ‘workers’ ducking out from behind cover and racing to move a single wheelbarrow of rubble from point A to point B. In those few seconds, they may have received a lifetime maximum dose of radiation and were (hopefully) sent home after accomplishing that one task.

The average global background radiation is 0.27 microS/hour (that's millionths of a Sievert). If we multiply that number by 24x365, it yields an average yearly dose of 2.4 mS/yr.  TEPCO workers are permitted to receive 250 mS/yr, while U.S. nuclear worker standards are 100 mS/yr, which is roughly 25 times greater than background.

The average airport security screening device delivers a dose of 0.25 microS, or the equivalent of a full day's background radiation. If that alarms you, just know that during the actual flight you take, the average exposure is ten times higher than that providing 2.7 microS per hour of flight at cruising altitude, or ten times normal background. So a 5-hour flight at cruising altitude will provide you with a dose of gamma radiation that measures 54 times more than you get at the airport screening itself, or two full days worth of background radiation.

Again, at these levels, I am not even remotely concerned. If there were something to worry about, then the epidemiological data from flight attendants and pilots would have long ago revealed a health concern. That's one reason why I'm not worried about periodic episodes of 10x normal background radiation.

Of course, the Sievert is a very crude scale, developed a long time ago. One might argue that the biological impact of airport screeners and whole-body gamma irradiation might be more subtle and complex due to differences in tissue responses and how the radiation is concentrated on the surface of the skin by airport scanners. All of that remains an open question to me, but not enough of one to concern me.

Still, the point here is that we are surrounded by radiation all the time, and we absorb a yearly dose no matter where we live but Denver-ites get a lot more than people living in Miami due to the altitude (less atmospheric protection from extra planetary gamma arrays).

Here's a link to a super useful graphic that visually shows the Sievert doses of both ordinary life and the Fukushima accident in relation to each other.

Based on this chart, plus all of the information above, even if your background radiation goes up by a factor of ten or twenty, I wouldn't be concerned.

Contamination Is the Real Danger

But radioactive contamination?  That's a whole different beast. 

By "contamination," I mean ingesting some radioactive isotopes or particles that become lodged in the body somehow. Perhaps it's a small speck of radioactive dust that gets lodged in the lung where it will persist (like coal dust and asbestos do), or perhaps it's a substance that our bodies try to accumulate because it resembles a biologically useful element (as is the case with iodine or strontium).

In Part II: The Contamination Threat, we examine in depth the threats posed by radioactive contamination, including the most prevalent contaminants to be wary of, and the compounding effects of bioaccumulation and biomagnification. One of the most nefarious aspects of contamination is how it uses Nature's processes against itself.

For the record, we are aware of no imminent public health threat from nuclear contamination outside of already-identified "hot zones." But for those who wish to better understand the risks and prudent protection measures related to the real dangers of a similar Fukushima-type event in the future (or an unfortunate escalation of the current Fukushima situation), being forewarned is forearmed.

Click here to access Part II of this report (free executive summary; enrollment required for full access).

Endorsed Financial Adviser Endorsed Financial Adviser

Looking for a financial adviser who sees the world through a similar lens as we do? Free consultation available.

Learn More »
Read Our New Book "Prosper!"Read Our New Book

Prosper! is a "how to" guide for living well no matter what the future brings.

Learn More »

 

Related content

18 Comments

sowhatareyousaying's picture
sowhatareyousaying
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 26 2010
Posts: 7
Awesome job explaining this!

Once again I am so grateful for your incredible gift for teaching, Chris.  As much as I have read elsewhere, nobody has been able to provide the clarity that you have here.  Brilliant treatment of a head-spinning subject. 

dryam2000's picture
dryam2000
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 6 2009
Posts: 275
Nice Article

Nice article!  It's hard to filter through all the information on this on the web.  

Just so I'm clear, you are saying that you would avoid seafood from the pacific coast until the data is more clear?  I know when there are a lot of variables involved in things like this it always come down to a personal choice.  In the past I have occasionally gotten seafood from Vital Choice with assurances that their fishing grounds have been thoroughly tested & no excess radiation has been found.  I think I probably will stop eating sardines & such.

Thetallestmanonearth's picture
Thetallestmanonearth
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 28 2013
Posts: 319
Not sure if this relates, but

Not sure if this relates, but as far as I can tell a lot (if not most) seafood is mislabeled, just because it says it's not from the pacific doesn't necessarily make it true.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/01/mislabeled-fish-stores-restaura...

Wildlife Tracker's picture
Wildlife Tracker
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 14 2012
Posts: 403
Mentioned this in the forum last week or so...

fukushima.png

 

http://www.peakprosperity.com/forum/84566/why-its-no-longer-safe-eat-tun...

 

Beyond cesium 137, the isotope Strontium 90 is another dangerous non-digestable metal that will accumulate in your bone. While Cesium 137 does pass through fat eventually, Strontium 90 will stay in your bone and this is something they are rarely testing for in our fisheries.

Thanks for this article Chris.

Wildlife Tracker's picture
Wildlife Tracker
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 14 2012
Posts: 403
@dryam

Eating sardines will likely result in a minor exposure to Fukushima contaminants as they feed lower in the trophic pyramid (plankton, and other small sea organisms); However, the danger in eating creatures that feed on sardines (sharks, tuna) creates a situation that may be harmful to your health as they are processing much more contamination on a daily basis.

Organisms are like sponges that absorb plastics, harmful metals, and chemicals. Concentrations of harmful isotopes to not have to be high in the open ocean for it to be dangerous as long as their are organisms around to absorb those harmful contaminants. 

RogerA's picture
RogerA
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 18 2009
Posts: 106
Cleaning your body from contamination.

Here are 2 ways.
Search for "Miso soup radiation" and "zeolite radiation" on the web if you want to know more. There are different variants of zeolite, try to get the most efficient. 

1. Miso soup.

During the 60's, students of macrobiotics and Zen began hearing about Dr. Shinichiro Akizuki, director of Saint Francis Hospital in Nagasaki during the second World War. Although Akizuki spent years treating atomic bomb victims just a few miles from ground zero, neither he nor his staff suffered from the usual effects of radiation. Akizuki hypothesized that he and his associates were protected from the deadly radiation because they drank miso soup every day.

In 1972, Akizuki's theory was confirmed when researchers discovered that miso contains dipilocolonic acid, an alkaloid that chelates heavy metals, such as radioactive strontium, and discharges them from the body. However, the most convincing evidence demonstrating the protection miso offers to those exposed to radiation was published in Japan in 1989. Professor Akihiro Ito, at Hiroshima University's Atomic Radioactivity Medical Lab, read reports of European countries importing truckloads of miso from Japan after the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. Ito reasoned that if people were protected from radiation by miso, then rats that were fed miso and radiated should develop less cancer than radiated rats that were not fed miso. Professor Ito was not surprised to find that the liver cancer rate for rats that were not fed miso was 100 to 200 percent higher than that of rats that were fed miso. Ito also reported that rats that were fed miso had much less inflammation of organs caused by radioactivity.

2. Zeolite. Used extensively in three mile island and chernobyl.

  • Over 500,000 tons of zeolite was airlifted in the chernobyl reactor to absorb radioactive metals
  • Cattle were fed zeolite to help keep radioactive ions out of milk
  • Zeolite “cookies” were baked for children to help reduce radioactive absorption
  • When soil contaminated with Cesium and Strontium was treated with zeolite, plants growing in that soil resulted in NO uptake of Cesium or Strontium.

 

 As reported by Japan News, the nuclear power plant operators began dropping sandbags filled with zeolite to help remediate the wastewater as it flowed into the ocean.

So even if you get contaminated. There are solutions.

There are other ways too.

 

Mark_BC's picture
Mark_BC
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 30 2010
Posts: 408
Thanks for the report. I have

Thanks for the report. I have considered getting a geiger counter ever since Fukushima. It would be interesting to test various materials in the home -- many are radioactive. It would also be handy for swiping nori seaweed from Japan before buying.

A few years ago I had a bone scan using a Technetium-99 injection. The medical system assures us that it's safe but I never trust them. Those scans give you 4 mSv, or 250 times less than what will cause nausea, or almost an entire year of normal background radiation. I also had a CT scan which is 2 mSv. I'm not too happy about this, especially since the scan was entirely unnecessary and my symptoms were actually greatly worsened by the actions of the doctors pushing and pulling on my leg (short story -- they thought the nerve damage might be cancer in the spine, but was actually from them tearing the nerve in my pelvis due to nerve entrapment from tight hamstrings -- I told them this but they wouldn't listen. I just don't trust doctors anymore, and this comes from other incidents as well). That's my advice -- try to stay away from the doctor (except for regular checkups), and don't do anything that doesn't feel right regardless of what the medical establishment tells you. Live a natural lifestyle with as little exposure to man-made chemicals as possible.

Thanks for the tip about miso soup chelating these elements, I'll look into that.

Bytesmiths's picture
Bytesmiths
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 28 2008
Posts: 200
Great Summary!

Very good summary. I'm gonna borrow some of your analagies in the radiological hazard classes I teach. :-)

You might be interested in my Geiger-Müler measurements after Fukushima. I have some background in metrology, and the methodology may be of interest.

Bottom line: you need long counts and long samples. The proper way to do this would be capture a stream and filter it, then read the filter. I alternated outdoor readings with indoor readings, and was puzzled when the indoor readings were higher! I then discovered that my supposed "control" measurements were actually measuring radiation from some dust on old books!

Also perhaps of interest is our radiation fallout plan. As Chris points out, the goal is to avoid ingesting contamination.

If Fukushima has taught us anything, its that nuclear power is totally dependent on a functioning electrical grid. A Carrington Event could result in hundreds of Fukushimas around the globe!

alfrede's picture
alfrede
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: May 15 2013
Posts: 20
thanks Bytesmith

Thanks for the links, & info; hard copying.

Bytesmiths wrote:

Very good summary. I'm gonna borrow some of your analagies in the radiological hazard classes I teach. :-)

You might be interested in my Geiger-Müler measurements after Fukushima. I have some background in metrology, and the methodology may be of interest.

Bottom line: you need long counts and long samples. The proper way to do this would be capture a stream and filter it, then read the filter. I alternated outdoor readings with indoor readings, and was puzzled when the indoor readings were higher! I then discovered that my supposed "control" measurements were actually measuring radiation from some dust on old books!

Also perhaps of interest is our radiation fallout plan. As Chris points out, the goal is to avoid ingesting contamination.

If Fukushima has taught us anything, its that nuclear power is totally dependent on a functioning electrical grid. A Carrington Event could result in hundreds of Fukushimas around the globe!

cmartenson's picture
cmartenson
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 7 2007
Posts: 5468
Great Fallout Plan
Bytesmiths wrote:

Also perhaps of interest is our radiation fallout plan. As Chris points out, the goal is to avoid ingesting contamination.

Bytesmiths,

I really like the clarity and completeness of your radiation fallout plan.  I would encourage people to print it out and put it with your planning materials. 

I especially like that the plan has a testing procedure that bypasses waiting for official announcements which we all know come late if at all, and watered down when they do.

Thank you for sharing.

 

Bytesmiths's picture
Bytesmiths
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 28 2008
Posts: 200
Glad to help!

Glad to help!

CaptD's picture
CaptD
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 2 2012
Posts: 32
What Japan Says vs What Japan Actually Does

 

What the Japanese "say they are going to do" may likely change if the Utility Gangs that run the Country decide that they no longer want to do whatever it is for any reason...
 
We have seen this happen countless times since 3/11/11 and I predict we will continue to see it happen in the next 40 to 100 years that Fukushima's "cleanup" is projected to take. It is especially important to note that these same Utility Gangs will be making huge profits because all work gets funneled through them, so I expect them to get even more protective of what they allow to happen in this very lucrative "nuclear make work project". In reality, this is just another version of the Somali Pirate hostage scheme, where the rest of the world is being held hostage by the Japanese Utility Gangs control of Fukushima's ongoing radioactive pollution.
 
Because of the international concern over Fukushima,  Japanese Leaders now realize that they might need to defend themselves (and their control over their own radioactive pollution). That is why we are now seeing many Japanese Leaders pushing for Japan to legalize the ownership of nuclear weapons, instead of secretly just having all the components to assemble any number of them at short notice should they be needed, a situation that many believe has existed for many years.
 
Additionally, Japan's newly enacted secrecy laws and recent questionable elections point out that although the majority of Japanese people want nothing to do with either nuclear reactors and/or nuclear weapons, those running the Country are simply doing what they want, while at the same time trying their best not make Japan look to much like N. Korea, where it is widely accepted that its people have no say at all.  
 
 
CaptD's picture
CaptD
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 2 2012
Posts: 32
Compact Geiger Counter that uses your smart phone

If you are interested in a cool simple to operate small Geiger Counter that uses your smart phone that not only take measurements but uploads the info to the web, then you might like this.

They also make a stand alone model...

http://iradgeiger.com/

CaptD's picture
CaptD
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 2 2012
Posts: 32
Radioactivity Study, Map and 70+ comments

 

Study: Fukushima airborne plumes “caused significant deposition of radioactivity over North America” — Especially for West Coast and eastern U.S. — Around 13% of all radioactive iodine released into atmosphere was deposited over USA and Canada (MAP)

 
http://enenews.com/study-fukushima-airborne-plumes-caused-significant-deposition-radioactivity-north-america-especially-around-west-coast-eastern-around-13-all-radioactive-iodine-released-atmosphere-deposited-usa
Bytesmiths's picture
Bytesmiths
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 28 2008
Posts: 200
CaptD wrote:... uses your
CaptD wrote:

... uses your smart phone...

Don't have a "smart phone." Didn't see any stand-alone models on that website.

Personally, I am cautious about things that need other things -- each layer of complexity increases fragility and reduces resilience. But if you're into high-tech, the ability to upload to a network is seriously cool.

Also, there's the matter of battery life. My stand-alone RadAlert will operate for many hundreds of hours on a 9V battery. An integrated smart phone monitor only operates as long as the smart phone does. At the time you may most need such things, the grid may be down!

CaptD's picture
CaptD
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 2 2012
Posts: 32
True but no sharing your info via the web

All true!

1.  They used to also offer a USB powered device that you could connect to your computer.

2.  Part of their plan is to share your specific reading with many others so as to get a far better picture of what is happening in your entire area, which is a no brainer with web based mapping!

Thanks for your reply!

CaptD's picture
CaptD
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 2 2012
Posts: 32
A Japanese Physician Encourages the Evacuation of Tokyo
 

A Japanese Physician Is Encouraging The Evacuation of Tokyo

February 14, 2014

http://www.vice.com/read/a-japanese-physician-is-encouraging-the-evacuation-of-tokyo

 
alfrede's picture
alfrede
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: May 15 2013
Posts: 20
scary False alarm

On or after Jan 2 i went to Dmitry Orlov's website & this was front & center [actually most of it was a link].  Again this is evidently a fabricated  FALSE REPORT, and was established as such soon after Dmitry posted it. I relate it here mostly to ask what are the real risks; and looking forward to Chris's next article.  

"January 2, 2014

Underground Nuclear Explosion At Crippled Japan Atomic Plant Shocks World

By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers

fzz3.jpg

fzz1.jpg

fzz2.jpg

fzz4.jpg

 

An ominous edict issued from the Office of the President of Russia today to all Ministries of the Russian Government ordering that all “past, present and future” information relating to Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster now be rated at the highest classification level “Of Special Importance” states that this condition is “immediately and urgently needed” due to a series of underground nuclear explosions occurring at this crippled atomic plant on 31 December as confirmed by the Ministry of Defense (MoD).

Of Special Importance” is Russia’s highest classification level and refers to information which, if released, would cause damage to the entire Russian Federation.

The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster was a catastrophic failure at the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant on 11 March 2011. The failure occurred when the plant was hit by a tsunami triggered by the 9.0 magnitude Tōhoku earthquake.

The plant began releasing substantial amounts of radioactive materials beginning on 12 March 2011 becoming the largest nuclear incident since the 1986 Chernobyl disaster and the second (with Chernobyl) to measure at the highest Level 7 on the International Nuclear Event Scale (INES).

According to this report, MoD “assests” associated with the Red Banner Pacific Fleet detected two “low-level” underground atomic explosions occurring in the Fukushima disaster zone on 31 December, the first measuring 5.1 magnitude in intensity, followed by a smaller 3.6 magnitude explosion moments later.

The MoD further reports that the 5.1 magnitude event corresponds to the energy equivalent in megatons of TNT of 0.0005, while the 3.6 magnitude event equals 0.0000005.

As a comparison, the MoD states that the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945 by the United States released the equivalent of 16 Kilotons = 0.016 megatons of TNT, about the energy equivalent of a magnitude 6 earthquake, and the largest hydrogen bomb ever detonated was the Tsar bomb, a device exploded by the Soviet Union on 30 October 1961, with an energy equivalent of about 50 megatons of TNT.

Important to note, this report continues, was that the architect of Fukushima Daiichi Reactor 3, Uehara Haruo, warned on 17 November 2011 warned that a “China Syndrome” (aka: Hydrovolcanic Explosion) was “inevitable” due to the melted atomic fuel that had escaped the container vessel and was now burning through the earth.

The MoD further reports that evidence that these underground nuclear explosions were about to occur began after mysterious steam plumes were first spotted on 19 December for a short period of time, then again on 24, 25, 27 December, and confirmed by a report Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) published on its website.

Most curious to note, this report continues, is that the United States appears to have had a more advanced notice of these underground nuclear explosions as evidenced by their purchase earlier this month (6 December) of 14 million doses of potassium iodide, the compound that protects the body from radioactive poisoning in the aftermath of severe nuclear accidents, to be delivered before the beginning of February 2014.

With experts now estimating that the wave of radiation from Fukushima will be 10-times bigger than all of the radiation from the entire world’s nuclear tests throughout history combined, and with new reports stating that dangerous radiation levels have been detected in snows found in Texas, Colorado and Missouri, this MoD report warns the US, indeed, is going to face the severest consequences of this historic, and seemingly unstoppable, nuclear disaster.

And not just to human beings either is this nuclear disaster unfolding either, this report grimly warns, but also to all biological systems as new reports coming from......."

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1729.htm

 

 

 

I was aware that the author had a reputation for disinformation and internet hoaxes, however I first heard of concerns about nuclear plants failing from Mr. Orlov; years ago. And he is an engineer. As I freaked out some, as I tried to research this. It was late and  After a few frightening hours I went back to Dmitry's site & the article and links were gone! The same conclusion I was beginning to think.

The point that turned the tide for me that this was false was a comment that the place near Argentina where Fukushima would melt thru the earth to, would require defying gravity and was clearly bunk.

Interestingly for me what I was most fearful of was the human reaction we would face, not radiation poisoning.

I hope the false risks help us more clearly identify the real ones.

 

 

 

 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments