Published: June 14th, 2011 at 8:12 am ET
|
Raw Milk: Dairy in Sonoma County, UC Berkeley, June 14, 2011:
The following are results for milk samples obtained from a Bay Area organic dairy where the farmers are encouraged to feed their cows local grass.
Cesium-134
Published: June 14th, 2011 at 8:12 am ET
|
sending...
Don’t worry – California Cows are “Contented Cows” – the radiation will not affect their milk.
Report Comment
Tests! WE NEED MORE TESTS!! 6/20 results?
Report Comment
Yes, saw that also…are they ahead of time??
Report Comment
A milk sample with a **Best By date of** 6/20 was added to our Milk results. Cesium-134 was detected again at levels similar to previous measurements, but Cesium-137 levels decreased.
Report Comment
They say this is all you need… 8|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-B2dK4kr7o
Report Comment
I suspect it’s a typo for ‘ 6/10′. Besides, powdered milk doesn’t taste THAT bad…does it?? I’m going to stock up on some more today. I’m still amazed at the utter lack of awareness of this mess here on the west coast. My neighbors think I’m a lunatic for worrying. I don’t even mention it anymore. I’ve decided to just quietly go about stocking up on food, water, and such. I truly hope I am overreacting, but I have a sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach over this.
Report Comment
Better to err on the side of caution…
Report Comment
.. where’s the ‘Like’ button .. !
Report Comment
I have been using powdered milk for my kids for 2 months now. Big change from the whole milk they are used too. They are worth it, and I take no chances. I also have stocked up on tuna, water, and canned fruit. I worry about future food becoming contaminated.
Report Comment
Results from 6/20? Check your atomic clock. Tda is 6/14. UCB is good, but not that good.
Here’s the link to their page re: testing and explaining why some of the previous results may have been overstated.
http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/UCBAirSampling
Report Comment
again, as already stated above: “A milk sample with a **Best By date of** 6/20 was added to our Milk results.”
It makes sense to read here @ Enenews, Marie Curie ..
Report Comment
Does anyone know why the MDA (minimum detectable amount) changes from one sample to the next? I’ve been wondering about that since they started posting test results. Just curious…
Report Comment
been wondering, too – maybe it depends on the *amount* they test?
Report Comment
They lost all credibility, in my mind, when the say:
“he number in parentheses is the number of liters of milk that one would need to consume to equal the radiation exposure of a single round trip flight from San Francisco to Washington D.C. (0.05 mSv).”
That it totally absurd, and gives people a false sense of security about drinking radioactive milk. Internal ionizing radiation is not comparable to external, non-ionizing radiation, such as would be received from air travel.
Report Comment
*when they say
Maybe enenews could put in an “edit” button as well?
Report Comment
yes please, I 2nd that request!
Report Comment
I totally agree, from what I’ve learned in the past weeks.
Report Comment
UCB fakes data?????
It seems so. No way it is 6/10 after 6/9
Money finally gets everything
Report Comment
would u pls elaborate why u think they fake data? thx .. !
Report Comment
As several others have pointed out, how does the data of 6/20 come out?
Report Comment
I don’t know who posted this: “My ‘safe’ foods list”. But it is posted on the Department of Nuclear Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, along with other comments.
http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/node/3361
Report Comment
I don’t use this safe list. There was already too much radiation in the US before Fukushima. I’m vegan and sprout a lot and try to eat 100% raw.
Report Comment
The dates UCB uses for their milk samples for testing are the SELL BY DATES!
Wake up people!
Report Comment