It pains me to see large parts of the media still hyperventilating over the very modest amounts of radioactive material coming from the Fukushima Daiichi plant on the east coast of Japan.
Nothing has been made more plain that most journalists and editors have no ability to evaluate risk, especially when it comes to radioactive measurements in very unfamiliar units (millisieverts anyone?). Everything they appear to know about radioactivity appears to come from poorly understood science reports and 1950s era B-movies.
You wouldn’t know from the coverage that that very same reactor survived a truly massive earthquake and a towering tsunami with barely a scratch even though it was built around 40 years ago in the expectation of surviving much lesser events.
You wouldn’t know that Japanese people are struggling to survive in the bitter cold, while coming to terms with the loss of family members, friends and entire neighbourhoods. You won’t hear that some survivors are being housed in other nuclear plants, everything else having been washed away.
Witness the BBC reporting today:
Japan nuclear plant: Radioactivity rises in sea nearby
The BBC’s Chris Hogg in Tokyo says the Japanese government has tried to reassure people about the plant’s safety
Levels of radioactive iodine in the sea near the tsunami-stricken Fukushima nuclear plant are 1,250 times higher than the safety limit, officials say.
The readings were taken about 300m (984ft) offshore. It is feared the radiation could be seeping into groundwater from one of the reactors.
But the radiation will no longer be a risk after eight days, officials say.
There are areas of radioactive water in four of the reactors at the plant, and two workers are in hospital.
The plant’s operator says the core of one of the six reactors may have been damaged.
It has announced that fresh water rather than seawater will now be used to cool the damaged reactors, in the hope that this will be more effective.
Why eight days? Because that’s the half-life of radioactive iodine. But that’s not what you find out from the BBC.
What of those two workers in hospital? Sounds serious doesn’t it?
Not all of the media are so poorly informed. The Register’s Louis Page has produced some well-researched articles which go a long way to explaining what is really happening:
The situation at the quake- and tsunami-stricken Fukushima Daiichi nuclear powerplant in Japan was brought under control days ago. It remains the case as this is written that there have been no measurable radiological health consequences among workers at the plant or anybody else, and all indications are that this will remain the case. And yet media outlets around the world continue with desperate, increasingly hysterical and unscrupulous attempts to frame the situation as a crisis.
Here’s a roundup of the latest facts, accompanied by highlights of the most egregious misreporting.
First up, three technicians working to restore electrical power in the plant’s No 3 reactor building stood in some water while doing so. Their personal dosimetry equipment later showed that they had sustained radiation doses up to 170 millisievert. Under normal rules when dealing with nuclear powerplant incidents, workers at the site are permitted to sustain up to 250 millisievert before being withdrawn. If necessary, this can be extended to 500 millisievert according to World Health Organisation guidance.
None of this involves significant health hazards: actual radiation sickness is not normally seen until a dose of 1,000 millisievert and is not common until 2,000. Additional cancer risk is tiny: huge numbers of people must be subjected to such doses in order to see any measurable health consequences. In decades to come, future investigators will almost certainly be unable to attribute any cases of cancer to service at Fukushima.
Nonetheless, in the hyper-cautious nuclear industry, any dose over 100 millisievert is likely to cause bosses to pull people out at least temporarily. Furthermore, the three workers had sustained slight burns to their legs as a result of standing in the radioactive water – much as one will burn one’s skin by exposing it to the rays of the sun (a tremendously powerful nuclear furnace). They didn’t even notice these burns until after completing their work. Just to be sure, however, the three were sent for medical checks.
So – basically nothing happened. Three people sustained injuries equivalent to a mild case of sunburn. But this was reported around the globe as front-page news under headlines such as “Japanese Workers Hospitalized for Excessive Radiation Exposure”. Just to reiterate: it was not excessive.
The entire article is well worth reading
But panic sells (as readers of WUWT are well aware), and sober analysis of scientific fact is nowhere near as exciting or is likely to spread like wildfire across the Internet.
No-one will die from radiation from Fukushima. No-one will mutate or develop super-powers. Godzilla will not rise from the sea and destroy Tokyo, except in cinemas.
It’s my view that the world deserves better than this. The real plight of the Japanese survivors of the earthquake and tsunami is being forgotten in the service of a bizarre fear about radiation that is more science fiction than science fact.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The final outcome of the Fukushima crisis is so uncertain that I think that WUWT is putting itself in a very fragile position by defending once and again the “no need to worry” meme. The truth is that the nuclear disaster hasn’t yet finished and it has the potential to become much worse than it is now. And if that happens in the end, WUWT will have lost quite a lot of credibility. And all for what? Nothing to win here. You will claim that you were lied to, about the true situation, and put the blame in others. But in the end it will be your credibility that will suffer.
So the media is exagerating? Great, denounce that. Explain which things that they said have no basis or are directly wrong. But don’t run with such uncertain predictions as “No-one will die from radiation from Fukushima”. We don’t know. At best, we know what is going on now, which may not be so bad, but we also know that we don’t know how it is going to evolve. The “nothing will happen” claims are as bad as the “cataclysm is comming” claims.
REPLY: Well, as Anna V points out even the BBC has a very popular article calling for the toning down of this sort of thing, so I suppose WUWT is in good company:
Viewpoint: We should stop running away from radiation
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-12860842
-Anthony
Roger Sowell says:
March 27, 2011 at 9:22 am
To an earthquake-damaged nuclear power plant with reactor fuel rods melting, that is not so good
What evidence due you have that anything is melting?
http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/tsunamiupdate01.html
At Unit 1, the temperature measured at the bottom of the RPV fell slightly to 142 °C. At Unit 2, the temperature at the bottom of the RPV fell to 97 °C from 100 °C reported in the Update provided yesterday.
What pains me is the downplaying of this disaster, and the wiping from history of the effects of Chernobyl, and the Japanese government keeping going reactors which have a long history of incompetance and lying by falsifying safety records. You choose to believe these people, those promoting that this is no worse than eating a banana, tell us how many bananas we have to eat to bear physically and mentally deformed children, to create the cancers and auto-immune diseases rampant after Chernobyl in the areas immediately affected and rising levels globally since nuclear weapons factories have been spewing this stuff all over us. All the whitewash and double-speak involved here should be easily seen through by those competent and scientifically savvy to see through AGW claims – so why aren’t you seeing it?
So they made a mistake an announced the truth before anyone could stop them, and now forced to retract?
What’s happened to the rods and plutonium? Anyone know?
No Godzilla? First no dragons from CERN and now no giant Tokyo-smashing amphibians (or was he a reptile?). I am so disappointed with modern science!
On a more serious note, I think the media stories say a whole lot more about how the media, political activists and politicians see nuclear energy and science than they do about the actual status and activities at Fukushima. That may be one of the larger lessons from this, along with how Japan rebuilds and reassesses their preparation and response procedures.
Bloke down the pub
China has a poor record for industrial deaths in all areas of industry not just in coal. It’s not balanced to point out deaths in the fossil fuel industry in China.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12876083
Ah Deutschland, you have grown wealthy, have prospered further under Merkel’s benevolent rule, your citizens widely enjoy lives of pampered comfort. So much so that they can believe such wealth can be thrown away to pursue Green dreams of renewable wind and solar power, that they can become one with the Nature that has steadfastly fought to eliminate humans from your territories for millenia. I shall miss you.
You know, that place just hasn’t been the same since that share of my ancestors left. Did they take too much of the common sense with them? 😉
You welcome to do your own search if the blog this is taken from offends.., but it’s the first one I found on the Reisch imput so I’m sticking with it for now.
“The Japanese authorities classifies the disaster as a four on the seven Ines-scale, which means “an accident without significant risk to the environment”. Reisch dismisses this as a cover-up:
– They have econonomic interests. This is a seven. During my years at SKI, I would not have talked, but now I’m retired and can speak freely.
– This is absolutely comparable with Chernobyl. It’s about the impact on a large area with many people and local release of radioactive material that is likely to be the case of lethal doses, he says, Aftonbladet reports.
Frigyes Reisch, 78, is associate professor of nuclear safety at the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH). Vover 27 years, until 1997, he worked for the Nuclear Power Inspectorate, SKI. In 1993 he worked a year for the IAEA as an international educator in the INES scale, including in Russia and the Czech Republic. …
– Given all the rescue workers who worked closely with the affected units and inhaled radioactive steam, it’s in reality impossible to not die of radiation. said Frigyes Reisch.
According to the “Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety” – France, the radioactive cloud will spread almost throughout the entire planet by March 26, 2011.
http://humansarefree.com/2011/03/fukushima-nuclear-disaster-as-bad-as.html
@harrywr2 on March 27, 2011 at 11:42 am
Re evidence for fuel rods melting — would you prefer cracked open? broken apart? overheated? first level of containment breached? Had a hole blown in it? Pick your preferred terminology. As to the evidence you request, I suggest one look at the hydrogen explosions, workers suddenly evacuated, radiation levels far above normal, or perhaps such things are not “evidence” to you.
We have a legal term in the US process industries, and that is “mechanical integrity.” It stems from 29 CFR 1910(j) and following, and is a Federal law. Basically, it means one must keep the fluid or hazardous material inside the pipe, or vessel, or equipment.
It is obvious that the reactors at the Fukushimal Daiichi nuclear power plant have failed the mechanical integrity requirement. The mechanism of that failure is not the issue at the moment. The degree of that failure, however, is paramount.
Unless, of course, you believe there are gremlins inside the stricken nuclear power plants that are maliciously bestowing highly radioactive materials in water puddles. And in the ocean near the plant. And in the air. And the surrounding ground.
DirkH says:
March 27, 2011 at 10:05 am
Francisco, you are talking like a green propagandist here – You imply that cancer is a certainty after receiving 100 milliSieverts. This is not so. 100 milliSieverts is the smallest dose that can be statistically linked to an increase in the occurence of cancer is what i read
==============
I have no idea where you pick up that I imply that cancer is a *certainty* after a dose of 100 millisievert. I am not sure you are grasping these units and time frames. You are confusing 100 mSv (that is, 100 mSv over a lifetime) with 100 mSv per year.
Back in 1990 the Committee on Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation estimated that 1 out of 100 people “would likely develop solid cancer or leukemia from an exposure of 100 millisievert of radiation over a lifetime with half of those cases being fatal.”
Please note the words “over a lifetime” We were talking of 100 mSv per year, not per life time. Assuming average lifetimes of 70 years, a radiation of 100 mSv/yr would be 70 times stronger than 100mSv per lifetime. It all depends how long you are exposed to it, of course.
Consider further that the figure of 1,000 mSv *per hour* being measured near the reactor is nearly 9 million mSv per year, or if you prefer, it is 87,600 Times stronger than 100 mSv per year and some 6 million times stronger than 100 mSv per lifetime.
Consider that a chest x-ray gives you 0.1 mSv. So one single day near that reactor would give you the equivalent of 240,000 x-rays. Or, if you prefer, 2.8 x-rays per second.
Now, what about a dose of 100 mSv/yr that you consider so inocuous?
Well, that would give you only 2.7 x-rays per day or nearly 1,000 x-rays per year, or some 70,000 x-rays over a lifetime.
If doctors and nurses listened to you, they would not bother to leave the room when they give you an x-ray.
I’m having real problems finding anything more recent on the fuel rods, this from March 16 – http://www.infowars.com/alert-fukushima-coverup-40-years-of-spent-nuclear-rods-blown-sky-high/
And again March 16 with good description of the problem: http://www.zerohedge.com/article/detailed-look-spent-fuel-rod-containment-pools-fukushima
Was the announcement of those extreme high levels actual figures from the containment finally failing?
Re: Strontium-90 (or lack thereof):
As other posters have mentioned, Sr-90 is relatively low activity (i.e. longish half-life) and has likely not been released in any appreciable quantity because it and its precursors are non-volatile.
Also, Sr-90 is a pure beta-emitter, that is, decays without emission of any characteristic gamma rays. As such, its activity is relatively difficult to measure. You have to first separate and purify the strontium from the overall sample, and then count its beta emissions. Under the immediate circumstances, there is no particular value to this extra effort, but in the long run I expect the food supply in the region will be monitored for Sr-90.
It is awfully hard to evaluate risk when you are lied to by three to seven orders of magnitude. That is about the difference between what nuclear engineers are told about deaths from 20th century bomb and radioactivity releases and the true numbers of cancer and childhood victims, immune problems and heart trouble.
The public senses it is being lied to and cannot evaluate risk because it knows it does not have the facts. Hence, you see a mad scramble for KI and KIO3 in the USA, where the radiation recieved just does not justify the trouble, even with correct information.
Hence, you see no understanding of the difference between Fukujima’s 40-year-old reactors and modern designs. We were told Shippingport had no radiation releases when it was millions of curies. There is no way to evaluate whether we are really being told the truth about modern reactors.
I am in favor of new nukes being built only by spacefaring nations, to train nuclear engineers. Nobody else has any business having them.
Nuclear power was proven in space in the 1060’s by both the US and USSR. This is our starship fuel and it should not be wasted here on Earth.
It would be a huge embarrassment to Japanese Engineering and National Pride to have to entomb even one of the reactors permanently in concrete. Even if that were determined to be the most prudent move right now, I have difficulty seeing them do it without a suicidal save attempt first…a “face saving” attempt by decree that the damage is salvageable. They want it to “look” ok. This is where the Asian Culture can interfere with what is prudent or practical.
I personally think that at least one of the reactors is “seriously broken”(if it overheated, it’s broken), and will be very difficult to manage.
I wonder what the troubleshooting manual recommends to do when it “gets broken”, and what the options are. Maybe that chapter hasn’t been written yet.
As a disclaimer, I am just guessing as the accuracy in details is elusive.
For them, us, and the world, I hope they can fix it without the concrete.
The dog fetched this: http://beyondthecurtain.wordpress.com/2011/03/26/radioactive-fallout-from-fukushima-approaching-same-levels-as-chernobyl
about this:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20285-fukushima-radioactive-fallout-nears-chernobyl-levels.html
Say Austrian researchers using worldwide network of radiation detectors – designed to spot clandestine nuclear bomb tests.
Roger Sowell says:
March 27, 2011 at 12:47 pm
“Unless, of course, you believe there are gremlins inside the stricken nuclear power plants…….
================
There are “gremlins” in every machine/process, ask any engineer.
The whole idea is to anticipate and defeat the “gremlins”.
Roger Sowell says:
March 27, 2011 at 12:47 pm
“Re evidence for fuel rods melting — would you prefer cracked open? broken apart? overheated? first level of containment breached? Had a hole blown in it?”
Melting is current tense.
The temperature required to ‘melt’ uranium fuel rods is somewhere around 2000C.
Here is a link to a nice drawing from the Japan Safety Agency including the temperatures on the outside of the reactor core TODAY. Not last week. Not two weeks ago but TODAY.
http://www.nisa.meti.go.jp/english/files/en20110327-2-2.pdf
Here is an article from the MIT Department of Nuclear Engineering on Decay Heat
http://mitnse.com/2011/03/16/what-is-decay-heat/
Here is the radiation levels at the plant gate on the 21st
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/monitoring/11032115a.pdf
Here is the radation levels at the plant gate today
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/monitoring/11032801a.pdf
I think you will find the level of radiation has decreased 96% in 6 days and continues to drop.
Here’s the radiation in drinking water by prefecture…
http://www.mext.go.jp/component/english/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2011/03
Here’s the radiation levels in all but 2 of Japans prefectures today.
http://www.mext.go.jp/component/english/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2011/03/27/1304324_2719.pdf/27/1303966_271300_1_2.pdf
Did something bad happen? Yes
Is anything currently melting? No
Is there any evidence that anything will be melting in the near future? No
The plant operators have to dissipate about 6 MWt of heat per hour per reactor at the current time.
Down from 3,000 MWt they had to dissipate when the earthquake hit, and the 50MWt per hour they had to dissipate when the Tsunami hit.
Pete H says:
March 27, 2011 at 10:45 am
Daryl M says:
March 27, 2011 at 12:21 am
“If you want to see for yourself the reason why we should not adopt large scale coal power, take a trip to China. I was in Guangzhou, Shanghai / Wuxi and Beijing last week and I can say that they were by far the most polluted cities”
Daryl, I can only say you spent to much time in the Shanghai bars!
That’s a useful remark.
I have worked in Shanghai, Guanzhou and Wuxi for the last 6 years. Since the Olympics and the recent Expo in Shanghai and the even more recent Asia games you obviously have no idea what you are talking about.
I must have been imagining the smog and imagining the comments of my colleagues about it.
I have photos from the last 6 years that prove you are talking rubbish and I can only think you have very little time in China. Many of my friends are astonished by the improvements around the cities and you make no mention of the millions of trees that have been planted around the areas!
Okay, so it’s better than it was. It’s still extremely polluted. China, like most totalitarian states, shows little or no regard minor details such as pollution.
The coal power stations being built have scrubbers fitted and your knowledge of both China and their efforts to allow its people a standard of life that you take for granted makes me want to puke! I would suggest you start at home before having a pop at a country trying to make life better, against all odds, for its people. Or are you simply scared your country is financially owned by China? You sound like a typical sick green trying to keep the 3rd world in the dark ages!
Go ahead and puke if it makes you feel better. You don’t even know what county I’m from.
On that note, I will disregard any further posts from you.
(Moderator, if the previous post should be allowed to stand, my reply should also.)
[Reply: Putting quotation marks around the comments you’re responding to would be helpful. ~dbs, Mod.]
Let’s find some sense of proportion here. Sure the journalists are not experts in matters radiological (or usually anything else) and sure, they tend to sensationalize. Who here just fell off the turnip truck and didn’t know that? Read history, our U.S. history or any history and, and where ever freedom of the press is allowed, you’ll always find examples of journalistic excess. You’ll also see that the fourth estate plays a very important role, important though not perfect, in showcasing the abuses of power where concentrations of power exist: political, corporate, religious, intellectual.
I think the hatred of the MSM and bashing of same is shows an ignorance of history and human imperfection, and an ideological bent to blame or demonize others rather than solve problems. I was astounded how many here wanted to trivialize the nuclear disaster in Japan 10 days ago by comparing it with bananas. I am astounded that now into the third week of the disaster some pollyanna posters would still rather bash journalism and greens and anyone on their political hate list rather than make a helpful contribution. This is a catastrophic emergency. Three Mile Island was a blip compared to this. No one was injured there, and after 4 days the emergency was practically over. I think CNN (and most of the other MSM that I follow) have done a credible job most of the last two weeks. I am not a green or an alarmist of any kind. When I owned a company that did radon testing and mitigation in the 1980’s, I took a course in Health Physics, so I understand that. When Professor Bernie Cohen (who discovered the high levels of radon in many houses in the 80’s) of the University of Pittsburg did a statistical (zip code) study in the early 90’s and found no correlation between the areas of in-house high radon levels and health effects, I disbanded my company because crying wolf when there is little or no threat is dishonest. In Japan right now there is are multiple catastrophes including a nuclear threat of unknown proportions. We don’t know what the outcome is. Let’s not be naive about journalism or dishonest about the threat.
Last link – I’ve found the 10 million times original here: http://whatreallyhappened.com/categorty/fukushima-disaster
On post March 27, 08:11 – with the observation on it “Note the comment about how the materials only created by fission are being found. This means one of two things. Either the reactor cores are now confirmed as breached, and/or the fuel rods in the reactors and spent fuel pools are undergoing uncontrolled fission. Given the increasing levels of radiation, I would conclude the latter.”
Thank you for that very clear explanation, Francisco. I had been trying to get my head around the implications from the post with the diagram and got as far as working out that per hour wasn’t being taken into consideration, but my mind baulked at having to work out what that meant in the confusion of millis and micros and greys and rems..
Regarding management of the initial cooling:
It’s my understanding that the battery back-up power system worked just fine for 8 hours right after the diesel engines were flooded out and quit. That battery power kept the cooling system working… I’m guessing until about 10pm Friday night.
That sounds like a DC system. Flying generators in to keep a charge on the batteries to keep the cooling going seems the easiest immediate solution and a no-brainer.
Since it was a Friday afternoon/evening and heading into the weekend, and communications were spotty or non-existent from the “quake-unami”, and the main commercial suppliers of generators may have started closing for the weekend and the message was “closed, call back on Monday”… Finding the owners may have been difficult or maybe even “impolite to be calling them at home”. A declaration of emergency would have been in order to acquire the appropriate generators. Even the militaries there might have had some available… were they asked?
Why generators were not flown in as a “National Emergency” is a puzzle to me.
Did I hear some were shipped in but the wrong plug? That’s an easy workaround….
Was it because of the weekend? Somehow this easy fix was bobbled.
Show me the blueprints, I’ll tell you what you needed to make it work.
And I know… hindsight is 20-20…
Also, with 6 reactors, that’s 6 separate cooling stations, and even more with the spent fuel pools. Quite a challenge even if everything had gone smoothly.
Best regards to all of you in Japan, keep safe.
Fukushima has been emitting radioactive iodine and caesium at levels approaching those seen in the aftermath of the Chernobyl…. worldwide network of radiation detectors….. show that iodine-131 is being released at daily levels 73 per cent of those seen after the 1986 disaster. The daily amount of caesium-137 released from Fukushima Daiichi is around 60 per cent of the amount released from Chernobyl.
Video of plume:
Not only are the dangers of low dose ionising radiation exaggerated, however. The experimental radiobiological evidence points consistently and repeatedly to a significant POSITIVE HEALTH EFFECT of doses in the range below about 100 mGy. (The use of Sieverts is a red herring here since for low-LET radiation that accounts for most exposure from nuclear accidents such as Fukushima, the quality factor = 1 therefore Grays = Sieverts. Plus doses are more or less whole body. It is only where neutron or alpha particle radiation are a significant factor that it is necessary to use Sieverts. Thus Gy (joule per kg absorbed energy) is the more transparent and logical unit.) The health-positive effects of low dose radiation consist principally of immune stimulation and concomitant tumour suppression. A small sample of the voluminous literature in support of this is summarised below:
(1) Int J Radiat Biol. 2011 Feb;87(2):202-12. Epub 2010 Nov 10.
Anti-neoplastic and immunostimulatory effects of low-dose X-ray fractions in mice.
Nowosielska EM, Cheda A, Wrembel-Wargocka J, Janiak MK.
PURPOSE: The exploration of immune mechanisms of the tumour-inhibitory effect of exposures to low-level fractions of X-rays.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: BALB/c mice were exposed to whole-body daily irradiations with 0.01, 0.02, or 0.1 Gy X-rays per day for 5 days/week for two weeks. Then, mice were intravenously injected with L1 tumour cells, killed 14 days later, and neoplastic colonies were counted in the lungs. Natural killer (NK) cell-enriched splenocytes and activated peritoneal macrophages (Mϕ) were collected and cytotoxic activities of these cells against susceptible tumour targets were assayed. Concanamycin A (CMA) and antibody against the ligand for the Fas receptor (FasL) were used to inhibit the NK cell-mediated cytotoxicity. Production of nitric oxide (NO) was quantified using the Griess reagent. Secretion of interferon-γ (IFN-γ), interleukin-1β (IL-1β), interleukin-12 (IL-12), and tumour necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) was measured using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays.
RESULTS: All the exposures to X-rays significantly reduced the number of the induced tumour colonies and enhanced cytotoxic properties of the NK cell-enriched splenocytes and activated Mϕ.
CONCLUSION: Suppression of the growth of pulmonary tumour colonies by irradiations of mice with low-dose fractions of X-rays may result from stimulation of anti-tumour reactions mediated by NK cells and/or cytotoxic macrophages.
kinda speaks for itself to those intelligent and / or honest enough to listen. Note that low dose here means up to 100 mGy/mSv or 100,000 uGy/uSv
(2) Cheda A, Wrembel-Wargocka J, Lisiak E, Nowosielska EM, Marciniak M, Janiak MK (2004) Single low doses of X rays inhibit the development of experimental tumor metastases and trigger the activities of NK cells in mice. Radiat Res. 161(3): 335-40.
Here by “low” they mean 100 – 200 mGy (or for low LET photon ratiation, quality factor = 1, the same as 100-200 mSv) – this is MASSIVELY higher than anything being measured around Fukushima.
(3) Kojima S, Nakayama K, Ishida H (2004) Low dose gamma-rays activate immune functions via induction of glutathione and delay tumor growth. J Radiat Res (Tokyo). 2004 Mar;45(1):33-9. Department of Radiation Biosciences, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Tokyo University of Science, Noda, Chiba, Japan. kjma@rs.noda.tus.ac.jp
(4) Li W, Wang G, Cui J, Xue L, Cai L (2004) Low-dose radiation (LDR) induces hematopoietic hormesis: LDR-induced mobilization of hematopoietic progenitor cells into peripheral blood circulation. Exp Hematol. 32(11):1088-96.
Hormesis means a health-positive effect of radiation such as tumour supppression. The aim of this study was to investigate the stimulating effect of low-dose radiation (LDR) on bone marrow hematopoietic progenitor cell (HPC) proliferation and peripheral blood mobilization. Mice were exposed to 25- to 100-mGy x-rays. 75-mGy x-rays induced a maximal stimulation for bone marrow HPC proliferation. Marrow from pre-irradiated mice showed improved proliferation of HPCs when transplanted into mice with marrow ablated by high dose radiation. The authors suggest possible clinical application for marrow transplantation.
Short summary – transplanted bone marrow grows better in the recipient after being pre-irradiated in the donor. Again – think about it, IF YOU DARE.
The picture can be summarised as follows:
(a) mammalian (that includes us) immune systems are constantly busy destroying pre-cancerous cells
(b) radiation exposure gives a chemical (e.g. free radical) insult which STIMULATES the immune systen to higher activity
(c) this stimulted activity results in increased effectiveness in removing cancer cells – LESS cancer, not more.
(d) This finding is highly repeatable – check for yourself at PubMed central (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed)
(e) where radiation exposure becomes unambiguously dangerous is at higher levels (several hundred mGy) where tissue damage, critically blood capillary damage, occurs. This is much higher than the level needed to cause gene expression and cellular responses.
i frequent this site daily for alternative views on climate change and always appreciate and respect the commentary that you make in your articles. But in all honesty, this commentary on this particular article is just flat out bogus. I understand how you might think the nuclear disaster could be taking away from the plight of the japanese people due to the earthquake and tsunami, but what does any of that have to do with the nuclear disaster itself? I don’t think you’re in the position to comment on the current nature of the radiation being release, nor the rate and nor the amount. I don’t believe I remember you mentioning that you build nuclear power plants in your spare time or that you are a nuclear energy expert. The true nature of what is going on in Japan can’t be accurately assessed because Japanese officials, just like Russian officials during the Chernobyl disaster, are withholding information regarding the true scope of the disaster. One simply has to use common sense and video footage review to know that, this isn’t a walk in the park and it shouldn’t be undermined with passive aggressive commentary. With 1 million deaths being attributed to the Chernobyl disaster worldwide, you can’t nor could you ever make ANY sort of estimation about how many people will be affected world wide by this. I’m very disappointed in the ignorance that went into this article and have come to expect better from this site. Thank you.
You Can View Official EPA Radiation Readings
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/03/you-can-view-official-epa-radiation.html
Friday, March 18, 2011
You Can View Official EPA Radiation Readings
Update: The EPA’s servers have either been crashed by too much traffic generated by this post, or the EPA has taken down the radiation data. Check back later to see if the EPA’s servers are working.
Please note that the radiation readings I looked at were NORMAL when the site was still up.
As I’ve previously noted, the San Jose Mercury News reports:
EPA officials, however, refused to answer questions or make staff members available to explain the exact location and number of monitors, or the levels of radiation, if any, being recorded at existing monitors in California. Margot Perez-Sullivan, a spokeswoman at the EPA’s regional headquarters in San Francisco, said the agency’s written statement would stand on its own.
Critics said the public needs more information.
“It’s disappointing,” said Bill Magavern, director of Sierra Club California. “I have a strong suspicion that EPA is being silenced by those in the federal government who don’t want anything to stand in the way of a nuclear power expansion in this country, heavily subsidized by taxpayer money.”
Many people assume that – if you can’t find your own geiger counter – you don’t have many choices, other than relying on vague government announcements or scattered sources of information.
However, even if the EPA won’t publicly discuss radiation levels, we can go look at the EPA’s numbers ourselves. … and we don’t need Anonymous to hack into the EPA’s site to do it.
Specifically:
1. Click on the following link: https://cdxnode64.epa.gov/radnet-public/query.do
2.In the bottom right box labeled “Fixed Monitor Location”, click on the location of the monitor that you want to see results from
3. In the lower left box labeled “Time Range Criteria”, specify the date range for the desired radiation readings
4. The upper left box labeled “Available Parameters” gives various beta and gamma radiation readings. Highlight as many as parameters as you wish. Click the right arrow (to the right) to put them in the “Selected Parameters” box, or the double right arrow to select all.
5. Hit the “Submit” button at the bottom of the screen. If there are no results, hit the back button on your browser, select ” Deployable Monitor List” to the right of “Monitor Type”, and then manually highlight one of the monitors in the “Deployable Monitor Id” box.
6. Once you get results, you can create charts or graphs of the information. Just scroll down on the results page to the box labeled “Custom Graphical Plot”, and choose your x-axis. I like “Measurement Start Date/Time”.
7. Click either the “Scatter Plot” or “Line Graph” button at the bottom of the results page.
Graphic of Fukushima nuclear plume on 3/27/11
http://www.zamg.ac.at/display.php?imgPath=/pict/aktuell/20110325_Reanalyse-I131-Bild5_gr.jpg&imgTitle=Radioaktivit%26auml%3Bt+von+Fukushima+15+Tage+nach+Beginn+des+Unfalles+%28Prognose%29&imgSource=%26copy%3B+ZAMG&imgWidth=842&imgHeight=596