Physician in Canada on Cancer Estimates: Epidemic of Fukushima radiation-related deaths from consuming Pacific fish? “Vast implications for human health” — “I eat so much salmon… I’m vulnerable”

Published: October 3rd, 2013 at 4:00 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
54 comments


Title: Fish data belie Japan’s claims on Fukushima
Source: Georgia Straight (Canada)
Author: Alex Roslin
Date: Oct. 2, 2013

[...] About 800 people worldwide will get cancer from radiation due to Fukushima in fish eaten to date [through mid-July 2013], according to Georgia Straight calculations. The Straight results relied on a widely used cancer-risk formula developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as well as radiation levels in 33,000 fish tested by the Japanese Fisheries Agency. [...]

Two nuclear experts who saw the Straight’s figures said the real cancer toll could be 100 times higher—or 80,000 cancers. [...]

Erica Frank, a Vancouver MD, was taken aback when told the Straight’s results. “How can a person do anything but gasp?” she said in a phone interview. “That’s horrible. This is the beginning of a potential epidemic of radiation-related deaths from fish in the Pacific. It has vast implications for human health.”

Frank is a professor of population and public health in UBC’s faculty of medicine [...] She said that after Fukushima, she decided to stop eating fish from Asia. She is especially concerned about impacts on B.C. migratory salmon. “I eat so much salmon. I love salmon; I am vulnerable.” [...]

See also: Physician: The salmon migrate through radioactive plumes coming off Fukushima, then we catch them on Canada's shores -- Concerned about lack of testing -- Officials "rely on Japan for test results" (VIDEO)

Published: October 3rd, 2013 at 4:00 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
54 comments

Related Posts

  1. Reports from Alaska: Many salmon with strange growths inside, concerns about health and safety — “Skin illness on white fish raise concerns… Never caught any like this” — Gov’t predicts ‘catastrophic’ king salmon run (PHOTOS) January 28, 2014
  2. Marine biologist in Canada: Salmon species needs to be tested for radiation — Gov’t doesn’t want us to know August 19, 2011
  3. Unprecedented: Sockeye salmon at dire historic low on Canada’s Pacific coast — “We think something happened in the ocean” — “The elders have never seen anything like this at all” — Alaska and Russia also affected (MAP) August 19, 2013
  4. Canada TV: New concerns about radiation levels in fish from Pacific — “These numbers are just staggering” — Contamination up considerably — “It’s a major event worldwide” (VIDEO) October 7, 2013
  5. Biologist finds pink salmon that are canary yellow on Canada’s Pacific coast — Insides also yellow: Heart parts, gill arches, spines, cartilage in head — Spleens swollen, livers spotted, some with bugged-out eyes (PHOTOS) October 17, 2013

54 comments to Physician in Canada on Cancer Estimates: Epidemic of Fukushima radiation-related deaths from consuming Pacific fish? “Vast implications for human health” — “I eat so much salmon… I’m vulnerable”

  • J.

    There are several ways we should all talk about NPPs henceforth.

    First, we equate NPPs with WMDs and MAD.

    Nuclear Power Plants are Weapons of Mass Destruction.

    They are instruments of Mutual Assured Destruction.

    Nest we talk about PI4P.

    That's Persistent Inhalable Ingestible Ionizing Industrial Particles.

    PI4P is easy to remember.

    That's what NPPs (WMDs) produce.

    That's what causes MAD.

    NPP create
    PI4P that are
    WMD and cause
    MAD.


    Report comment

    • J.

      Alternatively:

      NPP are WMD
      They create PI4P
      That cause MAD.


      Report comment

    • We Not They Finally

      Legally what are the implications for both EPA and all our Govt agencies that early on knew exactly the dangers of radiation and did nothing to warn the American people regarding the plumes from fukeshima and the contamination of the fish and the ocean and everything else and did nothing to warn us as to them??They even went so far as to up the level of radiation that becomes harmful enormously to keep Americans in danger with no way to safeguard their health. Obviously Govts want to safeguard the heath of the mega corporations but certainly not any one elses well being..Can this lead to legal action to be taken against them?


      Report comment

      • Buffalojam

        WNTF – Which legal system would you expect to receive a fair and impartial hearing at to redress your grievances? What evidence do you have that would overcome the hundreds of expert witnesses the gov't. would produce at such a hearing? Considering the situation we know we are all in (slow motion ELE) what remedy would you seek? Wishful thinking can be good for the soul but not so much at a legal hearing. I would focus on making our spiritual and physical path as easy as possible and be satisfied that there are no winners in this situation. Best wishes!


        Report comment

      • Alas, WNTF, there is no court on this planet that would allow such suit. Or if it did, with the power to enforce the verdict. Nukes were granted blanket immunity from truth at the very beginning of their existence. That immunity was required in order to sell the technology to a skeptical public. And this is why you will never hear truthful assessments of biological damage done. Oh… and then there's 'Sovereign Immunity' to protect governments that endorse the lies under the rubrik of 'National Security'.

        The industry players and pet governments will never count excess cancer deaths as caused by nuclear oopses. No matter how many projected deaths are enshrined in the Cost-Benefit Analysis. It would never be admitted that YOUR cancer death was one of those. That's the 'random' part of "Premeditated Random Murder."


        Report comment

  • *this* is the info, I think, that people need to hear. I say this because I have been wondering how to grab people's attention — they all still seem so asleep (as distrustful as I am personally of any belief which construes positions as in any way superior).

    You see, I have made a flyer out of an appeal and petition from Harvey Wasserman over at Globalresearch.ca & I have been passing it out, but it isn't enough, QR code and all. I retitled it "think of it as less than two months to avert an extinction level event"; this is the URL:

    http://femalefaust.blogspot.com/2013/09/think-of-it-as-two-months-to-avert.html

    A petition to stop TepCo from cowboying the removal of the quote spent fuel end quote (I refer to the unused fuel assemblies that were in the #4 SFP originally). (and not even mentioning all the shenanigans and secrecy that make me wonder what's really going on). Wasserman says if you can think of something better, do it, but everyone must do something. I agree. So I made flyers.

    But somehow that doesn't do it; thinking about that would just depress me.

    This info would make good bumper-sticker material, no?


    Report comment

  • dodge

    This article is somewhat miss-leading. Worried because "I eat so much Salmon"… but unlike the risk from smoking or many environmental factors – with bio-accumulation of radioactive particles a single ingested particle has the potential to migrate to a critical area, and slowly but steadily (invisibly and silently) begin to destroy cell DNA and cause all kinds of health problems. This places you or your children at risk even when visiting a friend – at a benefit – at a working lunch even should you normally be Salmon adverse, and eat even a small portion to be polite. This bus has left the station – undetermined numbers of victims will be in pipeline for hundreds of generations, a silent, quiet tribute to the greed of our generation.


    Report comment

  • mungo mungo

    like this…..
    Environment Pollution in Japan on Thursday, 03 October, 2013 at 10:14 (10:14 AM) UTC.
    Description
    This is a school 50 kilometers northeast of Tokyo, in a city called Moriya. A local citizens' group recently carried out examinations on 85 children under the age of 18 and found out that 58 of them, or 70 percent had radioactive cesium in their urine samples. The kind of cesium detected is a fission product formed in nuclear power plants. Members of the group say there's a high chance the cesium entered the children's bodies after eating food contaminated with radioactive material.


    Report comment

  • TheBigPicture TheBigPicture

    R A D I A T I O N

    Soon nobody will consume seafood, thanks to nuclear.


    Report comment

  • Once again they're missing the point….

    "I eat so much salmon", he says.

    There's a larger picture.

    They don't realize that all life on Earth is connected. When we mess with one species – or in this case with a giant oceanic ecosystem – the problem is not that the doctor won't be able to enjoy salmon.

    This human-centered slant is inevitable, but there is so much more at stake, and humans will only be collateral damage of a much greater ecological tragedy. It took billions of years to produce the wonderful ecosystems we have today.

    This out-of-control nuclear volcano, courtesy of TEPCO and the Japanese government, has only started to sicken and kill life on Earth.

    And since we don't see any significant public awakening as to the danger of nuclear power, we are bound to have more Chernobyls and more Fukushimas and more Hanfords in our lifetime. And I'm only naming the most destructive among them.

    We need to stress the dangers of nuclear energy.
    =============================

    We've been brainwashed with the characterization of nuclear energy as "clean energy".

    We need to tell our governments that "nuclear power for peaceful purposes" is not acceptable – not here, and definitely not in unstable countries all over the world.

    Fukushima is not an aberration. It's not just an "accident". This is what the nuclear industry IS really about.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    http://ottersandsciencenews.blogspot.ca/


    Report comment

    • Statement of the day. ;)

      "…there is so much more at stake"
      – Tracy W

      According to Arnie Gundersen, on average, a nuclear catastrophe happens about every 7 years.

      Maybe sooner, now that the majority of NPPs have passed their operational expectancy age. We also have more intense weather patterns becoming the norm. Most of these Death Machines were not necessarily built to withstand some of these changing extremes. Many built near coastlines.

      One has to ask…
      Q: "What were they thinking?".
      A: Not about you or your children, that's for sure.


      Report comment

      • @ ChasAha

        Exactly. Aging reactors and more intense weather patterns. Those two aspects need to be added to the long list of risks.

        ~~~~~~~

        I've been reading accounts of storms lately. Two excellent books: Isaac's Storm (Galveston in 1900) and The Great Deluge (Katrina). Last night I watched a documentary about the 2012 storm Sandy. I'm trying to understand how scientific and governmental authorities deal with these things.

        The picture of govt. incompetence they paint should completely freak us out.

        There is no anticipation or preparation for disaster. And once it happens, government officials at all levels are bumbling and pathetic incompetents. Victims are on their own.

        ~~~~~~~

        If there is a nuclear accident in North America – and it does not need to be as bad as Fukushima – there are no realistic plans for evacuation or for dealing with the aftermath.

        But authorities keep operating these reactors, fixing problems as they appear – and, I suppose, praying very hard that the worst scenario never happens.

        The general public does not want to think about it. And the government-run media make sure we never do. There are always political crises and scandals to distract us.

        I bet that the most we'll hear about is regarding the safety of seafood. They'll try not to touch the subject of nuclear energy itself – its risks, the lies they've told us about it, and the long history of covered-up radioactive contamination and near-misses.


        Report comment

        • HoTaters HoTaters

          Tracy W. — fixing problems, or just limping along, as is the case with the Davis-Besse plant. Now its crack has grown to 30' long (as I recall). See the article on Enformable re: this.

          It seems fixes are only made when they are MANDATED. When the regulatory agencies & their members are "in bed" with the industry, what do you expect?


          Report comment

      • mairs mairs

        Iran wants 10 nuclear power stations, in the most seismically active region in the entire world.


        Report comment

    • bo bo

      I agree tracy. This scientist has such a shockingly shallow grasp of the situation.

      'No more sushi…oh boo hoo!'

      More like:

      'No more earth.. oh boo hoo'


      Report comment

      • bo bo

        And she stopped eating 'fish from Asia' …
        What does that even mean?
        The ocean is connected.


        Report comment

      • mairs mairs

        Maybe her reaction is a good thing. Scientists are human beings. If she has a gut reaction of self-preservation, maybe that helps these people to stop being distanced from the consequences of what's going on.


        Report comment

        • bo bo

          I agree any coverage is better than nothing. I get overly sensitive lately of the packaging of 'bad news' which subtly distance the urgency.. (pacific ocean on 'our side' is still ok !) but sooner or later after enough of this news being released one after another many people will take the initiative to start researching on their own (and perhaps find enenews..) Afterall it's about what they eat.

          I was actually surprised yesterday how much my boyfriend's mother knew of fukushima, and she was aware of what has been going on in Plymouth, and its dangers. It was obvious to me she haf been starting to research on her own. Each news segment becomes a trigger for people to start their own path.


          Report comment

          • HoTaters HoTaters

            bo, Enenews has about, 1,000 new readers in the last couple of weeks. Maybe that's an indication awareness is gaining momentum? "Followers" on Facebook have gone from about 12, 350 to 13,296, since just before Typhoon Man-Yi hit the Japanese coast.

            If it took 2 1/2 years for the following to reach 12,350, and just a couple of weeks for it to reach 13,300, maybe there's hope people are starting to wake from their stupors.

            And if I point a finger at anyone (being formerly one of the "sleeple" there are three pointing back at me.


            Report comment

        • HoTaters HoTaters

          And maybe the scientists will have a closer look at the news and data.


          Report comment

  • Socrates

    Food from the Pacific becomes a vector of contamination. Hot particles showered us from the jet stream. Buckyballs are coming to the West Coast. Milk has radioactive iodine. Cesium comes down in rain.

    Eventually, the above vectors will exert a cumulative effect with bio-accumation and bio-manification of radionuclides. This will be added to the chemical pollution we are already exposed to. These mutagens and carcinogens act synergistically.

    Our political leaders worry about debt ceilings and sequesters. The public health burdens from the Fukushima disaster will add trillions to the debt. Meanwhile, ocean fish will be too dangerous to eat.

    We need to understand that life will never return to a pre- 3-11 innocence where the Pacific Ocean was part of Eden and a bread basket to the world. Eve took a bite of that fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil and Prometeus stole fire, etc.

    What else would one expect from the obvious risks of boiling water with the most dangerous substances?


    Report comment

  • weeman

    The data is based on 33,000 fish tested by Japanese fisheries agency, why do you think that the two scientists that reviewed the paper state that it could be 100 times higher?, they do not trust the data that the Japanese fisheries agency supplied, you know that they are underestimated.
    Would you trust their data, not me not for a second,
    The deception continues, can't fool a fool but i can still skin the cat.


    Report comment

  • Here's the list of now-banned from import foodstuffs from 14 prefectures in northeastern Japan…

    http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cms_ia/importalert_621.html


    Report comment

  • PhilipUpNorth PhilipUpNorth

    Fukushima 311 signalled the death of the Pacific Ocean Fishery.

    The damages from the permanent loss of the Pacific Rim Seafood Industry is in the hundreds of billions of dollars US.

    Anybody who is still eating fish of Pacific origin, or of unknown origin, is just asking for trouble.

    "…after Fukushima, she decided to stop eating fish from Asia."
    And so should we all.

    The death toll from eating contaminated seafood, by the way, will be in the millions.

    Much of the death will be a result of the crinimal refusal of the US Government to ban contaminated Japanese imports.

    Hell, the US isn't even testing!


    Report comment

  • bo bo

    Also about the pacific northwest salmon… I don't know much details about the extent of contamination of Hanford, but hasn't salmon there already been hot for a long time?

    My brother lived in Seattle for years and being japanese, he consumed a lot of fish. He developed chronic fatigue syndrome. This was before 3/11, and I just thought he was unlucky back then. But after fukushima and learning about radiation, then finding about Hanford, I started wondering if he wasn't hit with Hanford salmon from Columbia river or some other fallout related to that. Chronic fatigue symptoms are so similar to radiation sickness.


    Report comment

  • TheBigPicture TheBigPicture

    P L U T O N I U M . . C E S I U M

    The diversions are intended to get your mind off the steam rising from unit 3.


    Report comment

  • Cataclysmic Cataclysmic

    "The average radiation levels are below Japan’s ceiling and Health Canada’s much higher ceiling of 1,000 becquerels per kilo for cesium and iodine 131.

    But the radiation detected can still cause cancer, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s cancer-risk formula, a leading international standard for forecasting cancer risks from radiation. The

    What’s more, the EPA formula underestimates cancer impacts because it doesn’t fully include all research on radiation impacts, in the estimate of Daniel Hirsch, a UC Santa Cruz nuclear expert.

    (Also according to Hirsch, Health Canada uses a less accepted cancer-risk formula that underestimates the dangers even more.)

    Hirsch helped preside over a study of nuclear-power workers in the 1990s that found cancer rates at least six to eight times higher than predicted by official formulas."

    Alex Rosin, Thank you. Your articles are great!

    http://www.straight.com/life/497651/cancer-risk-linked-radiation-levels-fish-species-after-fukushima


    Report comment

  • RAY-D-8-TED-DREAMS

    All of the supermarkets in my area have started labeling their salmon and other fish as "Atlantic Caught" which is extremely strange because so little salmon sold here comes from the Atlantic compared to the Pacific and Atlantic Salmon always cost much more. The stores here always sold Pacific Salmon for $8.99 a pound and fresh Atlantic Salmon went for $13.99 a pound. But this new crop of "Atlantic Salmon" costs only $8.99 a pound???
    This is a crime against humanity to falsely relabel Salmon this way.
    Anyone else see this happening in the stores around them?/


    Report comment

    • We Not They Finally

      Nor surprisingly. Probably also difficult and slow to get any appropriate agency to check on it. We're all better off just not eating fresh fish. Frozen fish that some specific company packages under their label, you can usually at least see where it comes from. That's probably the least precaution people should take to protect themselves.


      Report comment

    • HoTaters HoTaters

      RAY-D-8-TED-DREAMS, do you mean the fish is labeled as "Atlantic caught" or "Atlantic salmon" ?

      Atlantic salmon is a species, and it is farmed in areas away from the Atlantic. Not a sound practice, IMO, for genetic reasons, but done, nonetheless.

      For example, NOAA states it is farmed in Chile and Washington State, British Coiumbia.

      http://www.fishwatch.gov/seafood_profiles/species/salmon/species_pages/atlantic_salmon_farmed.htm

      I think that's a very bad practice, because of cross-contamination of the gene pool with wild fish populations. But what do I know? I am only an egg.


      Report comment

    • PurpleRain PurpleRain

      Ray-D-8-TED-DREAMS. I'm in Florida and I have been noticing the salmon being labeled as Atlantic Salmon in grocery stores for the last two months or so. I've also noticed it being listed this way on restaurant menus. … After going without eating any for almost a full year, I did get tempted in with the label at a restaurant back in April or May. It tasted really good, but then afterwards I just worried and worried. My family wants me to buy it… the usual argument that "everything is bad for us anyway" … but I put my foot down (again) and now hope that we can stay firm and stay far away from the seafood counter.


      Report comment

  • razzz razzz

    They have Atlantic salmon farms, shrimp farms, tilapia farms. Here is an older article on tilapia fish farm around the world, covers waste, feeding, invasive, nutritional value and overcrowding. In China, who knows what goes on.
    Another Side of Tilapia, the Perfect Factory Fish
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/02/science/earth/02tilapia.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0


    Report comment

  • Mack Mack

    This article has several great quotes which need to be highlighted —>

    “Dilution actually does nothing except expose a larger population.” (Hirsch)

    “The nuclear industry tries to suppress the truth.” (Ochiai)

    “Cancer rates are going up. It’s a useful fiction for the nuclear industry to say no one died.” (Gundersen)

    “If you ingest radioactive material, there is a cancer risk associated with that.” (Lyman)

    “All this BS about natural radiation is used as an excuse to expose us to more radiation through their nuclear-industry processes,” (Folkers)

    “Even fish below limits pose a risk." (Hirsch)

    “We should keep uranium safely in the ground.” (Ochiai)

    “The allowed level of radiation in food is not the result of medical calculations but is a level which the atomic industry thinks it can accept. It’s very important to understand that the health of people plays almost no role in such calculations.” (Pflugbeilz)


    Report comment

    • "The cancer numbers also don’t include other possible health impacts from radiation in the fish, such as heart disease, stillbirths, and GENETIC DAMAGE to subsequent generations."
      – Pflugbei from article

      The cancer numbers (estimates) and number crunching in general are a distraction from the real issue which is….

      These Planet Killing Death Machines need to be stopped!


      Report comment

  • Sol Man

    How much product will the branded-mens' godlike corporations sell when everybody is in the cancer wards of the world?


    Report comment

  • ftlt

    Sorry, but it is not just in sea-food… It is going into the entire food chain, soils, waters and air everywhere…

    The ocean will deposit this on land in the future… Through mid ocean action aerosols dropped a rain over land masses, bird droppings, the food chain and coastal wave action mists…

    The stuff deposited in beginning 2011 is still here and this load has been added to over time (I have no doubts about that)..

    The Berkeley #s for dairy and greens con't to show elevated radioactive rates since 2011 until today…

    It is here… Yes, eating future sea food products will increase ones risk of exposure … But to think, you and yours are not now being and have been in the past exposed to FUFU toxics is wishful thinking..


    Report comment

  • Yes ftlt, radiation exposure is much more prevalent than most people realize. While doing research for my book my book <a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00EUIEQM6 ">"Radiation Detoxification- How to Detoxify Your Body"</a> I discovered that we are exposed to radiation through many everyday common items that we don't even think twice about having in our home.
    The good news is that there are some things that we can do to cut down on our exposure and the risks of us becoming sick from this exposure.


    Report comment

  • KingofthePaupers

    Two nuclear experts who saw the Straight’s figures said the real cancer toll could be 100 times higher—or 80,000 cancers. [...]
    Jct: They decry the Fukushima catastrophe yet understate it by a factor of 100! Must be pretty bad if they say it's terrible and it's actually 100 times terrible!


    Report comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.