Fukushima-Fuel Rod Removal starts November..Danger!

Aiming said:
There's another recent report about the town Naraha being re-opened again: former residents are being invited to go back to their home town with reassurance from the Japanese government that "radiation levels are safe", while Greenpeace and activists point out that the radiation levels are still too high and sending people back there is irresponsible:

"The Problem:
Nuclear Radiation and its Biological Effects

The Seed

The future of humankind is present today within the bodies of living people, animals and plants -- the whole seedbearing biosphere. This living biosystem which we take so much for granted has evolved slowly into a relatively stable dynamic equilibrium, with predictable interactions between plants and animals, between microscopic and macroscopic life, between environmental pollutants and human health. Changes in the environment disturb this balance in two ways: first, by altering the carefully evolved seed by randomly damaging it, and second, by altering the habitat, i.e. food, climate or environment, to which the seed and/or organism has been adapted, making life for future generations more difficult or even impossible."
Read more at http://www.ratical.org/radiation/NRBE/NRadBioEffects.html
 
Re: Article: Radiation levels correct?

3D Student said:
I suppose this is the main Fukushima thread, so I don't see a need to make a new thread. I just wanted to point out an article and my Geiger measurements.

This site:

_http://www.fukushimawatch.com/2015-09-16-fukushimas-radiation-has-finally-arrived-u-s-mainland-now-covered-with-invisible-blanket-of-death.html

mentions that the radiation is blanketing America with many times over background levels. I was curious and have a 2 inch "Pancake" tube Geiger counter, and haven't used it in years it seems. I did some background readings back in September 2013, both at work and at home.

At both locations, the background was 31.57 to 35.1 counts per minute. I did 30 minute, 1, 2, and 8 hour tests. So low 30's was the background. If I hold it up to brick it jumps to 70-80 CPM, reasonably so. I also put some pens from Japan and a hard drive under it and surprisingly it had slightly lower counter per minute (about one), even for an 8 hour test.

So last night I decided to do a one hour test. That article is claiming something like 5-20 times normal background radiation. I tested an area on my floor like two years ago and got 33.98 counts per minute. That's maybe half a count per minute high, but an 8 hour test might level it out to what I think would be very near what it was two years ago.

I've never made a measurement outside, but I'm thinking based on this test that the background radiation is not significantly different. It wasn't the most scientific test at just one measurement at one hour, but seeing that it matches what I had two years ago, it seems like their data is off? I mean it's not twice, or even a tenth increase in counts per minute. For my device, 100 CPM is a concern. If you go to the radiation network site it seems levels are pretty normal.

So I'm wondering if anyone has any data on their background radiation in the US? Also, I don't see how it would supposedly blanket the whole country. And how it took over 4 years to reach us; wouldn't the tropical storms accelerate the few thousand mile journey?

The Café Rad Lab is a new board opened by Luke from Enformable. He's starting a radiation detection seminar online. I think he'll be able to answer your questions or help you find the answers. He's made room on his new board for a webcam forum, so you'll find me there keeping a watch on TEPCO's disaster site.


Café Rad Lab

Index http://caferadlab.com/index.php

Radiation detection training http://caferadlab.com/forum-49.html

Webcam forum http://caferadlab.com/forum-18.html
 
Re: Article: Radiation levels correct?

3D Student said:
So I'm wondering if anyone has any data on their background radiation in the US? Also, I don't see how it would supposedly blanket the whole country. And how it took over 4 years to reach us; wouldn't the tropical storms accelerate the few thousand mile journey?

You might be interested in this ongoing series on Veterans Today - Your Radiation This Week by Bob Nichols. The latest one:

Your Radiation This Week No 22

Sept 12 to Sept 19, 2015

(San Francisco) September 19, 2015 – Good Day, this is “Your Radiation This Week.” These are the recorded Radiation Highs that affected people this week around the United States and in your neighborhood. Let’s get right to it.

RADIATION CPM* COMPARISON CITY STATE

*Listed in Counts per Minute, a Count is One Radioactive Decay Registered by the Instrument.

All Radiation Counts reported are partial Counts. Uncounted types of radiation include Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Neutron and X-Ray radiation. Uncounted radiation, if added, makes the actual Count higher and more dangerous.

The highest radiation reporting city is listed first, the least radioactive city is listed last. Still, all reporting cities are above normal.
Normal Radiation is 5 to 20 CPM.

2,252 CPM, 450.4 Times Normal, Billings, MT Gamma, Beta.
1,644 CPM, 328.8 Times Normal, Portland, ME Gamma, Beta.
1,397 CPM, 279.4 Times Normal, Miami, FL. Gamma, Beta.
1,326 CPM, 265.2 Times Normal, Champaign, IL Gamma, Beta.
1,255 CPM, 251 Times Normal, Pierre, SD Gamma, Beta.
1,223 CPM, 244.6 Times Normal, Spokane, WA. Gamma, Beta.
1,208 CPM, 241.6 Times Normal, San Diego, CA Gamma, Beta.
1,143 CPM, 228.6 Times Normal, Concord, NH Gamma, Beta.
1,095 CPM, 219 Times Normal, Bakersfield, CA Gamma, Beta.
991 CPM, 198.2 Times Normal, Boston, MA Gamma, Beta.
945 CPM, 189 Times Normal, Los Angeles, CA Gamma, Beta.
944 CPM, 188.8 Times Normal, Albuquerque, NM Closed-LastReport
929 CPM, 185.8 Times Normal, Kansas City, KA, Gamma, Beta.
888 CPM, 177.6 Times Normal, Oklahoma City, OK Gamma, Beta.
862 CPM, 172.4 Times Normal, Atlanta, GA. Gamma, Beta.
832 CPM, 166.4 Times Normal, New York City, NY Gamma, Beta.
803 CPM, 160.6 Times Normal, St. Paul, MN. Gamma, Beta.
779 CPM, 155.8 Times Normal, Tulsa, OK Gamma, Beta.
765 CPM, 153 Times Normal, Des Moines, IA. Gamma, Beta.
762 CPM, 152.4 Times Normal, Chicago, IL Gamma, Beta.
760 CPM, 152.4 Times Normal, Tucson, AZ Gamma, Beta.
722 CPM, 144.4 Times Normal, Indianapolis, IN. Gamma, Beta.
709 CPM, 141.8 Times Normal, Little Rock, AR Gamma, Beta.
630 CPM, 126 Times Normal, Ft Wayne IN Gamma, Beta.
630 CPM, 126 Times Normal, Pittsburgh, PA, Gamma, Beta.
596 CPM, 119.2 Times Normal, San Francisco, CA. Gamma, Beta.
577 CPM, 115.4 Times Normal, Ft. Worth, TX Gamma, Beta.
575 CPM, 115 Times Normal, Montgomery, AL. Gamma, Beta.
562 CPM, 112.4 Times Normal, Lubbock, TX Gamma, Beta.
515 CPM, 103 Times Normal, Sacramento, CA Gamma, Beta.
506 CPM, 101.2 Times Normal, Phoenix, AZ Gamma, Beta.
503 CPM, 100.6 Times Normal, Las Vegas, NV. Gamma, Beta.
472 CPM, 94.4 Times Normal, Rapid City, SD. Gamma ONLY
464 CPM, 92.8 Times Normal, South Valley, NM Gamma ONLY
443 CPM, 88.6 Times Normal, Lincoln, NE Gamma, Beta.
379 CPM, 75.8 Times Normal, San Angelo, TX. Gamma, Beta.
364 CPM, 72.8 Times Normal, Grand Junction, CO Closed-LastReport
333 CPM, 66.6 Times Normal, Dallas, TX. Gamma, Beta.
317 CPM, 63.4 Times Normal, Washington, D.C. Gamma, Beta.

Highest Recorded Radioactive City in America this week


A familiar Leader this week in the race for the Most Radioactive Weather in America is Billings, Montana with 2,252 CPM. Congratulations to Billings, MT as the Most Radioactive City in America this week. Billings was down just a bit from last week in this deadly race but is still First.

Portland, Maine’s Radioactive Weather wasn’t even a close Second and they endured 1,644 CPM. Other competing cities for the title were not even close. Nine cities exceeded 1,000 CPM this week in Your Rad Weather. Stay Alert and take all appropriate precautions.

Changes

Last week some unacknowledged source or sources spread measurable radiation all over the country. Like a Devil Wind it could be tracked for several days.

Read more at:
_http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/09/19/your-radiation-this-week-no-22-last-draft/

FYI - This is per the USA EPA Radnet radiation data - CPM=counts per minute:
50 CPM and over is abnormal - 100 CPM alert level - 300 CPM evacuation or hazmat
 
Re: Article: Radiation levels correct?

JEEP said:
You might be interested in this ongoing series on Veterans Today - Your Radiation This Week by Bob Nichols. The latest one:

And here are visualized maps of the world for reference; including much more of the U.S. in CPM:

U.S., Europe, Australia & South America Real Time RadNet Radiation Network Air Monitoring

http://www.eldoradocountyweather.com/current/radnet-airmap.html

Here is their data reference notes:

Readings not Equalized denotes the Monitoring Stations are broadcasting raw radiation counts from their Geiger counters, with out adjustment for different count rates existing between various Geiger counter designs. For instance, models built around a "Pancake" (see Map Legend) style of Geiger-Mueller tube typically have about a 3 times count rate over Standard tubed models, in that their readings in CPM should be expected to average about 3 times higher, anyway.

How the Radiation Map Works:

An ever expanding number of Radiation Monitoring Stations across the country (and world). In use are various models of Geiger Counters, they upload their Radiation Count data in real time to their computer using a Data Cable, and then to the Internet and to this web site, all is accomplished through GeigerGraph for Networks software. This is an automated system - there is no manual posting of data required.

How to Read the Map:

Referring to the Map Legend at the bottom left corner of the map, locate Monitoring Stations around the country that are contributing radiation data to this map as you read this, and watch the numbers on those monitoring stations update as frequently as every minute (your browser will automatically refresh). The numbers represent radiation Counts per Minute, abbreviated CPM, and under normal conditions, quantify the level of background radiation, i.e. environmental radiation from outer space as well as from the earth's crust and air. Depending on your location, your elevation or altitude, and your model of Geiger counter, this background radiation level might average anywhere from 5 to 60 CPM, and while background radiation levels are random, it would be unusual for those levels to exceed 100 CPM. Thus, the "Alert Level" for the National Radiation Map is 100 CPM, so if you see any Monitoring Stations with CPM value above 100, further indicated by an Alert symbol over those stations, it probably means that some radioactive source above and beyond background radiation is responsible.

Notice the Time and Date Stamp at the bottom center of the Map. That is Arizona Time, from where we service the Network, and your indication of how recently the Radiation Levels have been updated to the Map.
 
Re: Article: Radiation levels correct?

3D Student said:
I suppose this is the main Fukushima thread, so I don't see a need to make a new thread. I just wanted to point out an article and my Geiger measurements.

This site:

_http://www.fukushimawatch.com/2015-09-16-fukushimas-radiation-has-finally-arrived-u-s-mainland-now-covered-with-invisible-blanket-of-death.html

mentions that the radiation is blanketing America with many times over background levels. I was curious and have a 2 inch "Pancake" tube Geiger counter, and haven't used it in years it seems. I did some background readings back in September 2013, both at work and at home.

At both locations, the background was 31.57 to 35.1 counts per minute. I did 30 minute, 1, 2, and 8 hour tests. So low 30's was the background. If I hold it up to brick it jumps to 70-80 CPM, reasonably so. I also put some pens from Japan and a hard drive under it and surprisingly it had slightly lower counter per minute (about one), even for an 8 hour test.

So last night I decided to do a one hour test. That article is claiming something like 5-20 times normal background radiation. I tested an area on my floor like two years ago and got 33.98 counts per minute. That's maybe half a count per minute high, but an 8 hour test might level it out to what I think would be very near what it was two years ago.

I've never made a measurement outside, but I'm thinking based on this test that the background radiation is not significantly different. It wasn't the most scientific test at just one measurement at one hour, but seeing that it matches what I had two years ago, it seems like their data is off? I mean it's not twice, or even a tenth increase in counts per minute. For my device, 100 CPM is a concern. If you go to the radiation network site it seems levels are pretty normal.

So I'm wondering if anyone has any data on their background radiation in the US? Also, I don't see how it would supposedly blanket the whole country. And how it took over 4 years to reach us; wouldn't the tropical storms accelerate the few thousand mile journey?

Tools I always want on hand if I’m headed into the field.

GammaRAE II R by RAE Systems – ONLY MEASURES GAMMA

This is quite a handy little device and essentially the same as the Polimaster PM1703MO-1. These units are designed to give emergency responders a first alert when they come into close proximity with gamma-emitting sources. Mine has a small, sensitive, CsI detector and a compensated PIN diode detector for high range gamma doses. My favorite feature of these units is the way in which they alert the user – by logarithmic changes in the background. So I can walk around my basement and the unit collects the average background and displays it on the screen (generally between 4 uR/hr and 9 uR/hr). Anyone who has spent a lot of time with a detector knows that the longer you operate it, the more flux you will see in the measurements. “Background radiation” is not static and you will see variations and as you get more familiar with your equipment and the timing and manner of these variations you will identify trends which will yield hints at why you might be seeing the variations. So for me, to see the background count rate to bounce from between 4 uR/hr – 14 uR/hr is not unusual or unexpected, but I definitely want to know when the background levels go from 4-14 uR/hr to 30-45 uR/hr so I can try to figure out why. This is what the Gamma Rae II does, notifies you by lights, vibrations, or a very loud buzzer, that the background radiation levels have changed. It is generally the first detector that goes off. http://caferadlab.com/thread-81-post-227.html#pid227

I’ll talk about GM detectors next, because that is what I hear the most questions about. For me, GM detectors are only used for specific uses, but I don’t rely on them to tell me about minor variations in environmental radiation levels. When in the environment, don’t expect to measure a lot (if any) alpha, unless there has been a significant radiation release or you know you are in a contaminated area. That’s what these detectors are primarily used for, surveying for NORM materials, measuring external contamination, measuring radiation levels after a significant release of radiation (from a device, accident, etc..) These detectors just aren’t that efficient at detecting them, alpha particles only travel a few centimeters in air, so in normal background areas most of what you see will be gamma with a little beta contribution depending on how you are using it. They also saturate in high radiation fields and are not able to measure high radiation levels efficiently. The two primary designs are the long hot-dog shaped tube, or the rounded pancake with a mica window. The things to be aware of are that they are not sensitive to low-energy gamma photos, they over-respond at mid- range gamma photons (below 661 keV), and under-respond to high-energy photons (over 661 kEv). They normalize the detector response typically to Cs137 (661.65 keV). I do use them at times in the lab, but for gross counting purposes – and generally only screening at that http://caferadlab.com/thread-81-post-239.html#pid239

Measuring ionizing radiation is not simple. Right tool for the right job. What is your instrument measuring?

When Fukushima happened the major air release was carried by surface winds to NA, the plume reached the jet stream circling the globe in 40 days. The air releases will rain out of the atmosphere as random patches of fallout downwind of the plume. The open reactors and Japan's debris burning is a lesser radioactive release but has continued for 4 1/2 years spreading more nuclear particles downwind. The major sea releases moved slower; follow the tsunami debris, it started out under the fallout of the initial release and currents carried it to NA in 3-4 years. The open reactors are leaking to the sea and measured radiation levels set new records with each measurement reported. The tropical storms increase the fallout to the area and stir ocean sediments to new locations.
 
From Your Radiation This Week No 23:

UNACKNOWLEDGED NUCLEAR EVENT SWEEPS NORTHERN MIDWEST IN THE US. NO ENTITY TAKES CREDIT FOR NUCLEAR TERROR.

(San Francisco) Sept 26, 2015 – Thousands of nuclear savvy people know about the recently unleashed nuclear terror and no one says a word. No one in authority has breathed a word about the event yet. In a nutshell, here’s what happened: A powerful nuclear pulse was created somewhere in the upper Midwest and spread a radioactive wave front outward hundreds of miles across America’s Heartland. The pulse was recorded with yet another Thousand Point increase at the few active and published radiation stations with an unmistakable signature. God have Mercy.

Bob Nichols
[...]
2238 CPM, 447.6 Times Normal, Billings, MT Gamma, Beta.
1920 CPM, 384 Times Normal, Portland, ME Gamma, Beta.
[...]
459 CPM, 92.8 Times Normal, South Valley, NM Gamma ONLY
364 CPM, 72.8 Times Normal, Grand Junction, CO Closed-LastReport
219 CPM, 43.8 Times Normal, Washington, D.C. Gamma, Beta.

_http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/09/26/your-radiation-this-week-no-23/

FWIW
 
Re: Article: Radiation levels correct?

horse said:
Measuring ionizing radiation is not simple. Right tool for the right job. What is your instrument measuring?

I have an Inspector Alert like the one here http://www.mineralab.com/Inspector.htm . Looks like it measures Alpha, Beta, Gamma, and X-rays.

horse said:
When Fukushima happened the major air release was carried by surface winds to NA, the plume reached the jet stream circling the globe in 40 days. The air releases will rain out of the atmosphere as random patches of fallout downwind of the plume. The open reactors and Japan's debris burning is a lesser radioactive release but has continued for 4 1/2 years spreading more nuclear particles downwind. The major sea releases moved slower; follow the tsunami debris, it started out under the fallout of the initial release and currents carried it to NA in 3-4 years. The open reactors are leaking to the sea and measured radiation levels set new records with each measurement reported. The tropical storms increase the fallout to the area and stir ocean sediments to new locations.

Thanks for that. I was just surprised at how slow the ocean currents are.
 
Re: Article: Radiation levels correct?

3D Student said:
I have an Inspector Alert like the one here http://www.mineralab.com/Inspector.htm . Looks like it measures Alpha, Beta, Gamma, and X-rays.

Good instrument, with a pancake probe, excellent. Once you’ve established a background range for your instrument and location you can start measuring high energy sources. Many people report high energy readings from car air filters, wipes of the bottom of drain spouts, and pet food cans of fish.

I have many of the same concerns you do. Veterans Today may be cherry-picking the EPA radnet data for sensationalism, data that is incomplete and hard to access, without doing a thorough analysis. It only makes it easier for the nuclear industry to discredit those sources. See this discussion on EPA radnet data.

http://caferadlab.com/thread-87-post-287.html#pid287

No point in panic now, we were all dosed after the 311 meltdowns. Our lives shortened as radiation slowly damages immune systems, weakens heart muscles, promotes cancer, and destroys genes. Trying to prove a connection to radiation releases may be difficult without reliable data and that’s why I think it’s been made so hard for the public to get that information.

At Chernobyl another entombment is being built to contain the radioactive releases. Efforts at Daiichi have been too feeble to stop the emissions, worse yet, the melts are contaminating seawater.

The nuclear industry is pushing changes at regulatory agencies to increase the amounts of radiation the public should endure to save them a little money. They can get away with this if people don’t know what radiation is doing to them or how much is too much.
 
Yeah, I'd expect anything that is an accumulator of air or water to have a noticeably higher radiation level. I recall the C's session saying that Fukushima was just a drop in the bucket of water so to say, and that the accumulation over decades is what is really doing us in. And that vegetarians would be "nuclear toast". :shock: I hope the planet and Universe knows what it's doing in how to clean this psychopathic disaster up.
 
3D Student said:
Yeah, I'd expect anything that is an accumulator of air or water to have a noticeably higher radiation level. I recall the C's session saying that Fukushima was just a drop in the bucket of water so to say, and that the accumulation over decades is what is really doing us in. And that vegetarians would be "nuclear toast". :shock: I hope the planet and Universe knows what it's doing in how to clean this psychopathic disaster up.

Do you know which C's session mentioned Fukushima? Don't recall that one.
 
horse said:
3D Student said:
Yeah, I'd expect anything that is an accumulator of air or water to have a noticeably higher radiation level. I recall the C's session saying that Fukushima was just a drop in the bucket of water so to say, and that the accumulation over decades is what is really doing us in. And that vegetarians would be "nuclear toast". :shock: I hope the planet and Universe knows what it's doing in how to clean this psychopathic disaster up.

Do you know which C's session mentioned Fukushima? Don't recall that one.

I found this:

9 April 2011 said:
(L) Next question on the list: Is the fukushima radiation negligible compared to the radiation due to 2,000 + nuclear explosions that have happened since 1945?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) How badly will it affect people?

A: Cumulatively, it is already bad.

Q: (L) you mean cumulatively the 2,000 nuclear explosions? And now, this on top of all of that is like critical mass of exposure?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) So, what does that mean for us.

A: DNA changes and diet help to keep the frequency stable.
 
And immediately after that is the nuclear toast reference:

http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic said:
Q: (L) What about all the people who are vegetarians?

A: They are nuclear “toast” since so much of their energy must be expended to raise the vibrations of their food.

Q: (L) Is the Fukushima plant under control?

A: What?!?

Q: (Burma Jones) Like “you’ve gotta be kidding”?

A: Yes.
 
16 US Ships That Aided Japan Still Contaminated With Radiation
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/03/14/16-us-ships-that-aided-japan-still-contaminated-with-radiation.html?ESRC=navy-a_160316.nl

Mar 14, 2016 - CAMP FOSTER, Okinawa -- Sixteen U.S. ships that participated in relief efforts after Japan's nuclear disaster five years ago remain contaminated with low levels of radiation from the crippled Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant, top Navy officials told Stars and Stripes.

In all, 25 ships took part in Operation Tomadachi, the name given for the U.S. humanitarian aid operations after the magnitude-9.0 earthquake and subsequent tsunami on March 11, 2011. The tsunami, whose waves reached runup heights of 130 feet, crippled the Fukushima plant, causing a nuclear meltdown.

In the years since the crisis, the ships have undergone cleanup efforts, the Navy said, and 13 Navy and three Military Sealift Command vessels still have some signs of contamination, mostly to ventilation systems, main engines and generators.

"The low levels of radioactivity that remain are in normally inaccessible areas that are controlled in accordance with stringent procedures," the Navy said in an email to Stars and Stripes. "Work in these areas occurs mainly during major maintenance availabilities and requires workers to follow strict safety procedures."

All normally accessible spaces and equipment aboard the ships have been surveyed and decontaminated, Vice Adm. William Hilarides, commander of Naval Sea Systems Command, wrote to Stars and Stripes.

"The radioactive contamination found on the ships involved in Operation Tomodachi is at such low levels that it does not pose a health concern to the crews, their families, or maintenance personnel," Hilarides said.

The largest U.S. ship to take part in the relief operation was the aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan, which normally carries a crew of more than 5,000 sailors. In 2014, three years after the disaster, the Reagan's ventilation system was contaminated with 0.01 millirems of radiation per hour, according to the Navy. Nuclear Regulatory Commission guidelines advise no more than 2 millirems of radiation in one hour in any unrestricted area, and 100 millirems total in a calendar year from external and internal sources in unrestricted and controlled areas, so full-time exposure on the Reagan would be below that.

Plume of radiation In the days after the tsunami hit the Fukushima complex, the plant suffered multiple explosions and reactors began to melt down.

Officials from the NRC told Congress that extremely high levels of radiation were being emitted from the impaired plant. Japanese nuclear experts said winds forced a radioactive plume out to sea, and efforts to keep fuel rods cool using sea water caused tons of radiated water to be dumped into the ocean.

The Reagan was dispatched to take part in relief efforts, arriving the next day. Navy officials say the Nimitz-class nuclear-powered supercarrier stayed at least 100 nautical miles away from the damaged plant, but many sailors have disputed the Navy's accounting, saying they were so close that they could see the plant.

The Navy has acknowledged that the Reagan passed through a plume of radiation. Navy images showed sailors with their faces covered, scrubbing the deck of the Reagan with soap and water as a precautionary measure afterward. The Reagan and sailors stayed off the coast of Japan for several weeks to aid their Japanese allies.

The multibillion-dollar ship, projected to last at least 50 years after its launch in 2001, then was taken offline for more than a year for "deep maintenance and modernization" at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility in Bremerton, Washington, according to Navy officials.

"Procedures were in place to survey, control and remove any low-level residual contamination," the Navy said. "Personnel working on potentially contaminated systems were monitored with sensitive dosimeters, and no abnormal radiation exposures were identified."

Upgrades and cleaning also took place at the ship's next stop in San Diego.

Sailors who performed the work said it entailed entering spaces deep within the ship, testing for high levels of radiation, and if it was found, sanding, priming and painting the areas. They say there were given little to no protective gear, a claim that the Navy denies.

Of the 1,360 individuals aboard the Reagan who were monitored by the Navy following the incident, more than 96 percent were found not to have detectable internal contamination, the Navy said. The highest measured dose was less than 10 percent of the average annual exposure to someone living in the United States.

Radiation effects unknown Experts differ on the effects of radiation in general and, specifically, for those involved in Operation Tomodachi.

Eight Reagan sailors, claiming a host of medical conditions they say are related to radiation exposure, filed suit in 2012 against the nuclear plant's operator, the Tokyo Electric Power Co. The suit asserts that TEPCO lied, coaxing the Navy closer to the plant even though it knew the situation was dire. General Electric, EBASCO, Toshiba Corp. and Hitachi were later added as defendants for allegations of faulty parts for the reactors.

A spokesman for TEPCO declined to comment for this story because of the sailors' lawsuit, which was slated to go forward pending appeals in the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

The illnesses listed in the lawsuit include genetic immune system diseases, headaches, difficulty concentrating, thyroid problems, bloody noses, rectal and gynecological bleeding, weakness in sides of the body accompanied by the shrinking of muscle mass, memory loss, leukemia, testicular cancer, problems with vision, high-pitch ringing in the ears and anxiety.

The list of sailors who have joined the lawsuit, which is making its way through the courts, has grown to 370.

In early 2014, Congress ordered Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs Dr. Jonathan Woodson to investigate the claims.

After a peer-reviewed study into the levels of exposure, Woodson reported back to Congress, defending the military's response and safeguards.

Any illnesses that sailors have developed since the operation are not a result of the relief campaign, he said.

"There is no objective evidence that the sailors ... experienced radiation exposures that would result in an increase in the expected number of radiogenic diseases over time," Woodson wrote. "The estimated radiation doses for all individuals in the Operation Tomodachi registry, including sailors on the USS Ronald Reagan, were very small and well below levels associated with adverse medical conditions."

Furthermore, Woodson said, more sailors would have been sick if the levels were high enough to cause the illnesses cited. There were upward of 5,000 sailors aboard the Reagan at the time of the operation. He also said symptoms developed too early to be associated with the operation.

But Shinzo Kimura -- a professor at Dokkyo Medical University in Japan who has studied radiation exposure from Hiroshima and Nagasaki to Chernobyl and, now, Fukushima -- said it wasn't too early for sailors to show symptoms of exposure-related conditions. Doctors have seen conditions in children living near the plant that surfaced earlier than would normally be expected.

Kimura, hired by the Nihonmatsu city government for his expertise in the field, was the first scientist on the ground taking readings in the wake of the Fukushima disaster. He said each person and the way their body is affected by radiation is different.

While unable to definitively say if the sailors were sickened by the radiation, Kimura reasoned that the levels aboard the Reagan were high enough to cause illnesses. Otherwise, he said, why go through the bother of repeated cleanings to lower radiation levels?

"It is impossible to speculate or calculate how much the doses were before the two decontamination works," he said. "The U.S. military is very good at risk-management. Considering that, it is assumed that decontaminations were conducted twice because the levels were not favorable."

(Comment section has some good info.)
 
Hi Angelburst29, Thanks for posting that reminder of the sailor's plight. When I started researching how bad the Fukushima Dai-Ichi meltdowns were, the thing I noticed time and again was that radiation hazards were officially being minimized and that the damage control efforts to protect the nuclear cartel from bearing responsibility for any harm done were rather obvious.

Experts differ on the effects of radiation in general and, specifically, for those involved in Operation Tomodachi.

Experts would differ when all the different radioactive heavy metals and gaseous fission products have different characteristics and decay chains, some more toxic than others, but then they lump them all together into one unit of measure to use for risk assessment. Nuclear experts use the argument that if an external dose of radiation doesn't kill you immediately then no harm was done and base their judgments on inadequate studies of the survivors of the Nagasaki and Hiroshima atomic bombings. Relying on limited studies of a single high level external radiation exposure; any long term low level exposure effects can be extrapolated away. By focusing only on the immediate radiation hazard the long term chemical toxicity of the radioactive heavy metal poisoning is ignored even though the long term health effects of heavy metal poisoning, especially mercury and lead, are well documented. The use of depleted uranium, DU, has provided some information on the toxicity of a radioactive heavy metal.

The health effects related to internal exposure may result from either chemical or radiological toxicity. Solubility determines the kind of toxicity exerted by uranium. The soluble forms of uranium are more associated with toxic chemical effects while insoluble forms are associated with radiological effects. Soluble chemical forms are absorbed within days while insoluble forms generally takes months to years to be absorbed [2]. DU is organotropic and has long-term retention in its target organs, to wit the kidney and the skeletal tissue. The biological retention capability of DU in bones enhances the particulate radiation to the target organs. Though the mechanism of action of DU oxides are not clear, biodistribution studies detail DU accumulation in the bone, kidney, reproductive system, brain and lung with verified nephrotoxic, genotoxic, mutagenic and carcinogenic properties, as well as reproductive and teratogenic alterations [14].
http://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1476-069X-4-17

Radioactive fallout leaves a dusting of heavy metals scattered to earth that are toxic to life.
 
Hi. A big part of the picture is also the Pacific Ocean. I have been posting to another thread but I guess this is the one to use. There are a ton of articles related to the pacific, in essence, dying. So many species having unprecedented die offs; the food chain destabilized. I realize the C's made some comments right after the Fukushima incident in 2011 but that was then and now it is 5 years later. I think it is a whole different ballgame now.

Here is a related clip:

from Investment Watch: title of article says it all:

California bans commercial crab fishing due to excessive radiation in seafood

(NaturalNews Mar 27, 2016) In November of last year, California state officials placed an indefinite hold on the commercial crab season, in order to protect public health. The reason given by the state was dangerously high levels of algal toxins in the bodies of the crabs.

But according to New York radio station 95.1 FM (SuperStation 95), insiders from the California Fish and Game Commission have revealed that the real reason for the ban was dangerously high levels of radioactivity resulting from the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster.

Radioactive crab are so dangerous to eat that state officials felt the need to protect the public, Superstation 95 reports. But officials were unwilling to publicly admit the true reason for the ban, which contradicts official claims that the Fukushima disaster poses no threat to the U.S. West coast.
 
Back
Top Bottom