Professor’s Diary: Fukushima radioactive material “has reached the west coast as of June 2013 by ocean transport” — Health risks to be determined by ongoing monitoring

Published: January 10th, 2014 at 12:16 pm ET


Jay T. Cullen, Associate Professor of marine chemistry at the University of Victoria, Daily Kos diary, Jan. 4, 2014: […] Fukushima derived Cs has reached the west coast as of June 2013 by ocean transport but [the] concentrations of Cs continue to be well below levels thought to pose environmental or public health threats. There have been a number of popular press articles that […] report the timing of the arrival of the radionuclides but offer no perspective on the actual levels and the associated risk to residents of the west coast (e.g. link). […] About 93% of radioactivity in seawater results from the presence of primordial, naturally occurring potassium-40 (K-40) and rubidium-87 (Rb-87). The remaining 7% are radioactive elements deposited to the ocean from past atmospheric nuclear testing. […] Fukushima derived Cs was detected all the way to the coast in June 2013 with the highest levels of Cs-137 farthest offshore (0.0009 Bq/L or roughly 0.006% of background radiation) and lower levels of 0.0003 Bq/L toward the coast […] Ongoing monitoring will constrain the likely environmental and health risks posed by ocean transport of Fukushima derived radionuclides.

Note the professor changed the units to Bq/L for Cs-134 and -137, instead of using Bq/m3 as in the source document (pdf). The above amounts must be multiplied by 1,000 to get Bq/m3.

In addition, the figures provided by the professor appear to be inaccurate:

  1. According to the source document, it’s Cs-134, not Cs-137, that measured 0.9 Bq/m3 (or 0.0009 Bq/L if you modify the units like the professor).
  2. The professor writes that in June 2013 there were “lower levels of 0.0003 Bq/L toward the coast” — This amount is not in the  measurements for 2013, the only mention of it was in 2012: “Levels of 137Cs equal to 0.3 Bq/m3 measured at Sta. P26 in 2012.”

Last month in a Vancouver-area newspaper Prof. Cullen wrote: “the natural level of radioactivity on average in the oceans is about 13 Bq/L, against which radioactivity resulting from human activities and disasters should always be discussed.” What is the basis of this claim that “natural radioactivity levels should always be discussed” when “radioactivity resulting from human activities” is mentioned?

“In the ocean (and human body) different radionuclides have different fate and toxicity,” according to Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution’s senior scientist Ken Buesseler (who mentions his ability to be quoted in media reports downplaying Fukushima-related data).

Also be aware that fish can bio-concentrate cesium-137 at a rate of 100 times the level found in the surrounding water. For seals and sea lions it’s up to 1,000 times. (Source: IAEA)

For information regarding health risks, see: [intlink id=”gundersen-im-not-eating-pacific-ocean-fish-bioaccumulation-of-fukushima-nuclear-waste-concerning-radiation-effects-are-actually-worse-at-low-levels-than-predicted-video” type=”post”]{{empty}}[/intlink]

Published: January 10th, 2014 at 12:16 pm ET


Related Posts

  1. Canadian Newspapers: Gov’t “profoundly negligent” for not testing — Fukushima ocean plume detected at coast June 2013 — “My good feelings vanished… more I thought… less convinced I became” — Officials must be more forthcoming February 7, 2014
  2. TV: North America will not be safe from Fukushima radiation if plant keeps leaking — Animals “suddenly died” on west coast right after 2011 disaster… Whole world noticed this strange phenomenon — “Fatally high” levels of radioactive material has entered ocean… serious pollution is ongoing (VIDEO) April 28, 2016
  3. Gov’t Report: Elevated radiation on California coast to last “several decades” — Local marine life “will accumulate” Fukushima radioactive material — Plutonium a potential concern — “On-going monitoring clearly warranted” yet ‘surprisingly little’ underway (VIDEO) May 21, 2014
  4. Gov’t Report: Fukushima radioactive material still raining down on U.S. in 2013 — Contamination “worked its way into local ecosystems” — ‘Incremental impacts’ from Fukushima radiation release — Health implications ‘incompletely understood’ May 19, 2014
  5. Gov’t Expert: West Coast will soon be hit by 800 Trillion Bq of Fukushima Cesium-137 — Nearly equal to amount of fallout deposited on Japan — Levels in Pacific “higher than expected” — “Main body of surface plume has reached off coast of US” — Never slowed down while crossing ocean, contrary to prediction June 7, 2015

113 comments to Professor’s Diary: Fukushima radioactive material “has reached the west coast as of June 2013 by ocean transport” — Health risks to be determined by ongoing monitoring

  • Ontological Ontological

    "Also be aware that fish can bio-concentrate cesium-137 at a rate of 100 times the level found in the surrounding water. For seals and sea lions it’s up to 1,000 times".
    These facts seem to be used only as they require them. Then still deny the fact that radiation is effecting those animals.

  • No joke this is the real thing with real data from a 300 page Gov study, it boils down to this.

    Fukushima polluted island of Alaska with the same level of radio-nuclides, from 2000 miles away, as did some 1960's atomic bomb testing in Alaska AT GROUND ZERO same place in Alaska.

    What about the ocean 200 miles away…did that receive the equivalent of 20 atomic bombs, sure looks like it.

    There are 2 links here. The first is a review of my report (further reviewed by me in yellow highlight) and the second is my report. The original 300 Gov report is linked and downloadable in my original report.

    Folks this is as close to a smoking gun as I have seen. A direct, lab tested comparison of Fukushima to nuclear bombs.

  • High "Quality" troll invades ENENEWS

    the troll says all the Plutonium in Hawaii is "background" it was always there, just that no one was looking for it. Complete bald faced lie, the Plutonium went up 2900% to 3500% based on original pre Fuku EPA monitoring, and EPA results after Fukushima.

    The troll story, and the EPA data are here

    • Ontological Ontological

      Always been there, well yes bot only since they introduced MAN MADE plutonium to it.

    • soern

      hi stock,
      maybe it is OT, but today i was on your blog and liked to give some
      additional details for your banana thing:
      As i've read on a pronukers site Potassium is mostly available at 3 isotopes which are K39 (stable), K40 and K41(stable).
      Citing Potassium in our body (140g/body)after that report means
      99,9% of all Banana K is stable and only 0,0118% is K40.
      I tried to contact that author by his provided formular as he firstly declared we talk about 0,0118% K40 aff all potassium cited in that banana comparisons but suddenly changed to there was K40 only causing exactly your cited 4400 decays.
      I've got a mail delivery failure note.
      It was linked here but it is hard to search anything here, so i lost the link.
      Still i have that figure in mind, 99,9% of all Potassium is stable. Maybe an argument….
      How to comment on your blog? Didn't work.
      Nice regards

      • 99.9892% of potassium in all natural sources is stable. 0.0118% of potassium in all natural sources is K40. Which packs a whallop, but has a long half-life. Does account for most of our internal 'natural' dose (with radon contributing the most to lung doses).

        Your body maintains a natural level of potassium in use or stored for use, will change that out on a fairly regular basis, it's an important nutrient. You can eat a whole bunch of bananas for every meal for a month and not meaningfully increase your interior dose from K40 – your body will just cycle faster, and you might end up with constipation and start smelling like bananas.

        If you eat just 1 banana in which even 0.01% of the stable potassium has been replaced by cesium, you're getting that much EXTRA radionuclide inside. In addition to the banana's 'normal' store of K40. And cesium has a much shorter half-life, each atom is more likely to decay. It's excess dose. It is never NOT excess dose.

      • soern, comments seem to be working. I will beef up the banana debunk later


  • NoNukes NoNukes

    "Fukushima AIDS, part 3: Protracted radiation exposure, the immune system, and cancer.

    Fukushima AIDS, part 1 was a general overview of the immune system, and dealt with how Fukushima is affecting and will affect it in the coming years. Fukushima AIDS, part 2: Chronic radiation sickness described radiation illness in its different stages. This post will deal with protracted exposure to radiation, that is, radiation that lasts a long time, rather than in one shot, and how this affects the immune system and increases the risk of cancer.


    Washington’s blog (1) has a good entry on the effects of low-level radiation and protracted exposure. Fukushima has been emitting radionuclides into the air and sea for almost 3 years now. This is a fundamentally different situation from the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It is also different from Chernobyl, which burned for 11 days…"

    • Ontological Ontological

      After skull cancer, my immune system is walking on a fish line tight rope. With all the 38 readings were getting here, another station a gmc 320) was added to the area here in Henderson has had 39s. That is a dosimeter reading indicated. I don't plan to exist long. I can't believe, A) I survived it. B) That anyone so stripped of there former self could live very long. In 2 to 3 years cancer from exposure expectance at the current increasing levels will again rear its ugly head. So maybe 3 years tops even being diligent, be right back in with some other carcinoma issue. I refused the dental surgery to finish rebuilding my jaws, final bone alignment etc. no use in it. Too much pain for a life of just a few more years. I'll just have to learn sign language, when the remaining teeth are all too impacted for proper speech. I fear this sad tale reflects way too many peoples futures.

      • Ontological Ontological

        Great info NoNukes btw.

      • artika rama

        ontological I think its a good choice not go under all those operations and suffering but you shoudlnt give up your hope . I believe our mind is much more powerfull then we think . Your thoughts have a huge influence on your body . You must keep your attitude positive.
        Try alternative therapies ,, i am not saying give up whatever therapy you have now , but you have nothing to loose by trying alternatives right ?
        wish you strength and hope you get well soon .
        Never say / think i am not going to make 3 years or anything . Check out kevin blanch s videos on youtube . He shouldnt be alive today according to doctors . Keep positive.

      • NoNukes NoNukes

        We are Ontological. Your "tale reflects way too many peoples futures." Thank you for telling it. I wish that we could prevent this needless pain for you and everyone.

      • name999 name999

        …sounds so very difficult. Thank you for sharing this…highlights the real consequences of
        the destruction humanity has inflicted on our natural world and ultimately all living things.

      • Angela_R

        Ontological, what an ordeal you have endured. Though my thoughts are similar to Artika's re hope and further procedures, your comfort is what I am sure all would wish. The body, after all, is just a shell. The spirit can take its rest in sleep and arise refreshed to the world we hope for.

      • 4Yahshua

        1~11~5995 (out of 6000) Sabbath in this "Twilight Zone Apocalypse"!

        So SAD about your cancer ordeal! The GREAT news is that you are still here! To ease your suffering try natural meds. Large doses of Vitamin D3 (We take 30,000 i.u. day. There isn't any toxic level in this form.) will greatly help your immunity and will make you feel more happy (like rays of sunshine in your soul!) Drink almond milk and eat almonds in other ways like with dark chocolate. They contain natural cyanide that kills cancer cells. Eat shitake mushrooms cooked or raw ~ best mushroom for fighting radiation! Taking calcium/magnesium/zinc (capsules or liquid) at night will help you sleep, heal bones, and lessen pain. Grow something NOW in your home or yard. The benefits of doing this I cannot begin to tell you!
        The BIBLE = Best Instructions Before Leaving Earth!
        We are praying for your complete recovery and our survival in this "silent apocalypse"!!

    • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

      NoNukes, Pretty sharp information and link no doubt… 🙂

      "At some point it becomes an ELE." 🙁

    • I don't know of a way to reverse DNA damage, but the children of Chernobyl got spirulina, apparently with amazing results (for removing heavy metals).
      <a href="; title="Spirulina at Mercola">

      And for cleaning radioactive material out of water, I am curious what anyone has to say about graphene.
      <a href="; title="New GE Material">

      • artika rama

        markgm / ontological There are many alternatives like DCA treatment that some doctors claim it could decrease up to 70% percent of the tumor size .

        • Artika, That's an interesting thing to study. Too bad it's one of those "unfundable by big pharma" deals, but they will no doubt be working in the lab on something with similar chemical properties using a proprietary chemical structure.

          I suppose when it gets into cancer treatment, at that point, we are talking about a path along which we are attempting to deal with the DNA damage – thank you for pointing that out.

          There is the guy in Texas with the patent for using something from urine for treating cancer cases, and a lot of positive anecdotal results. I forget him name.

          • artika rama

            markgm i just saw your messaeg now sorry , i sometimes get lost on this site
            Yeah , you are right . Unfortunately unfundable by big pharma means almost nothing nowadays IMO . Unless its going to be an expensive medicine that they can make huge profits from , big pharma doesnt seem to be interested in anything . Or maybe they just cant put a trademark/ a patent on it and own all the rights so maybe THAT s the reason they are not investing / doing research research on it right ?
            In any case , there are scientists who believe that it works so i say , why not try it ? It is not something harmfull . Nothing to loose.

          • Ontological Ontological

            Thanks for the kind words. Ok serious Schrodinger cat let out of the bag alive! One word miracle cure for the carcinoma family of bizarre cell development: immunofluorescence. It lights up in multi spectral monochromatic light each type of cell squamous, on through to the rapidly replicating cells that result from invasion ELEments. within 2 years I was stage 4 almost. They used a surgical robot to remove my right leg fibula, and vascular tissues to do cardiovascular reconstruction, of the removed skull bone/jaws all inside of 12 hours! I did not need radiation or medical oncology chemo. Pre surgery I used natural alkaline compounds to slow the aggression of the bizarre replication, in the oral and nasal tumors.
            The fuel fleas are especially toxic, they electrostatically attach onto mucus tissue of an attracting charge, and soon after cause bone/soft pallet tissue invasions in months not years. So there is hope for a future, if we are allowed to have one.
            An example of carcinoma cells in these spectral wavelengths here.

  • Oom Werner P. Oom Werner P.

    correlation factor 1:1 = 100%

    "far distances"

  • Nick

    "But when I read that marine organisms and human beings are in danger along the West Coast of North America because of radioactivity from Fukushima, I have a responsibility to communicate to the public that this is not so. The radioactivity that we are exposed to here every day, by being on or in the water or from consuming seafood from the Pacific, is insignificantly different from the time before the terrible events at Fukushima took place. –
    See more at:

    According to Cullen. Chill folks, ya ain't gonna get sick.

    • Ontological Ontological

      Bull freekin shit bucko look above.

    • Sam Sam

      another ProNuker parroting

    • newsblackoutUSA newsblackoutUSA

      @Nick…..With all due respect, there are no safe levels of radiation…period
      Video from 4/21/2011
      Dr. Steven Wing, and Mr. Gundersen on the effects of radiation

    • clamshellernh clamshellernh

      Who did this study nick , who paid for it ? Follow the money .

    • harengus_acidophilus


      Duct sounds familar.


      • AllenH AllenH

        Just what I thought, everybody say HI to the new(old) pro-nuker.

        • newsblackoutUSA newsblackoutUSA

          Hi AllenH… I ran into a pro-nuker (in disguise) YouTube site claiming everyone is panicking for nothing about Fukushima. It reminded me of the dead body on the ground, and the cops saying "nothing to see here, move along"

          The Nuclear Cartel says: "Let them eat Yellow Cake"

        • Sam Sam

          It is important to quickly identify
          the ProNuker when they come onto
          the playground. Saying Hi we know
          who you are and what you represent.
          Leave them to play ball by themselves
          We all know / and are learning
          how to handle ProNukers here.

          • AllenH AllenH

            We get rid of one, only to have a similar sounding one take over, I would not be surprised if is him. By me saying Hi I am acknowledging he is a shill, yes. To call him out.

    • We Not They Finally

      Nick, Cullen should go give a pep talk to the dead marine life. Oh, I'm sorry, they're already dead.

  • pkjn

    Study: Dead sea creatures cover 98 percent of ocean floor off California coast; up from 1 percent before Fukushima
    January 02, 2014 (NaturalNews)

    The number of dead sea creatures blanketing the floor of the Pacific is higher than it has ever been in the 24 years that monitoring has taken place, a phenomenon that the data suggests is a direct consequence of nuclear fallout from Fukushima.

    In March 2012, less than 1 percent of the seafloor off California coast was covered in dead sea salps.
    By July 2012, more than 98 percent of the seafloor off California coast was covered in the decomposing organisms.

    NO more sea life means NO more oxygen in our atmosphere.
    Human life is dependent upon healthy oceans, the life of which provides the oxygen that we all need to breathe and survive.

    • ENENews

      Hi PKJN, notice the above article from January cites as a reference? Here's the initial report from Dec. 11th which is composed solely of direct quotes from the study and national geographic's report on the study (unlike the link you posted which claims "the data suggests [it] is a direct consequence of nuclear fallout from Fukushima"):

      Study: Type of dead sea creature covered 98% of ocean floor last year about 150 miles off California coast; Unprecedented, was below 1% prior to event — ‘Major’ changes began in spring 2011

      "The highest sea-floor coverage by detrital aggregates measured throughout the 24-y time series occurred between March and August 2012, when salp detritus ranged from <1% cover in early March to a high of 98% cover on 1 July (Fig. 1E). This was the only measurable deposition event of salps observed during the entire time series."

  • clamshellernh clamshellernh

    I want to see pictures of this ..are there any ? I believe it but dead life would cement what is going on

  • jump-ball jump-ball

    "Ongoing gov't NON-monitoring will constrain health risks" (typo fixed), but I'll keep watching private citizen GC detection videos showing radiation is both VISIBLE and LOCAL across N. America, in snow or rain on your car, on your clothes and wet shoes, on your residential metal rain gutters and your yard and garden, on your school playground, on air filters and tires on your vehicles and on filters in your home and workplace AC and air purifier units.

    For new newsers, private, non-nuke-partisan monitoring sites we can probably rely on as the contamination spreads and intensifies include: MICHAEL COLLINS, ENVIROREPORTER.COM
    ALLEGEDLYAPPARENT.WORDPRESS.COM Michaël Van Broekhoven LIVE INDOOR-OUTDOOR ST. LOUIS RADIATION, with nice U.S. maps of wind and Jetstream

    AND MIMI GERMAN'S new monitoring site RADCAST.COM, under construction, and her strong Abbey Martin interview this morning (see replay) on…

  • Socrates

    They nuked the Pacific Ocean. The fallout is all over North America.

    They underestimated the risks. They underestimated the potential consequences. They cut corners on safety to maximize profits. They are trying to downplay the actual consequences.

    They control the media. They try to control the science. They accept NO financial responsibility.

    How long can they conceal what they did? When people start to drop like flies? When their own children get sick?

    Associate professor Cullen make some errors apparently. Why? Write letters to the editor.

    • Ontological Ontological

      @Socrates: "They control the media. They try to control the science. They accept NO financial responsibility".

      I feel they are beginning to realize just how much we really do understand, no doubt more than some of their own nuketards. They are desperate, the more propaganda they roll out the louder the laughter.

  • We Not They Finally

    Mr. Cullen makes it all sound so benign. Wonder if the died-off species got the memo.

  • Ontological Ontological

    Many are reporting dead zones, some are reporting flourishing, other reports are whales & massive dolphin pods acting strangely.
    If any of the alarming geo-data I have reviewed is even close to accurate, reflections of the ancient extinction begin to illuminate phantasms of old school when I was educated about this ancient calamity, so similar to todays current circumstances. I presume the oil spill may have prompted this well done report.

  • jump-ball jump-ball

    When CPM BG counts TALK 100, agency BullS**t WALKS.

  • James Tekton James Tekton

    THIS may have already been posted, but for redundancy and posterity purposes, here is the ABC Nightline report again:

  • SykeWar(DELETED) SykeWar

    I read the diary. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but is he not assuming a sample or series of samples are fully representative of the entire ocean? I didn't see where the samples were taken. Are they taken from known possible "hot spots"? Or are they still clinging to the "the ocean absorbs all the radiation equally"? We need to monitor the food chain and what that means is, developing new technology to do this extensive testing, which I haven't heard about yet.

  • 16Penny 16Penny

    I don't think that word means what you think it means!

    "Ongoing monitoring will constrain the likely environmental and health risks posed by ocean transport of Fukushima derived radionuclides."

    : to limit or restrict (something or someone)

    : to use pressure to force (someone) to do something

    So can one of you nuke supporters explain the methodology used in the presumption that monitoring in some way will reduce the levels of radioactive contamination. Did Jay T. Cullen use the scientific method to prove this claim or did he just pull words out of a hat?

    • Ha! That is quite a twisted thought now that you point it out. Cullen participated in the WHOI sampling off Fukushima, and turned his papers in. He wrote about it on DKos (how not-concerning the contamination is), citing Buesseler. When I pointed out that polonium-210 is NOT "the most common radioisotope" in the world's oceans, you'd have thought I just explained to him that Santa Claus is a scam. Three or four times I invited him to do the Google for himself so he wouldn't have to blame me, but he wouldn't.

      Any scientist making absolutist assertions about something like contamination – and what dangers it may or may not pose to humans and other animals – should have at least a modicum of expertise in health physics, or should invite an author to make those assertions who does have that expertise. And when the not-qualified asserter refuses to even confirm for himself (easy, a 3rd grader could do it) when called on a glaring error. Errors don't disappear from a scholarly work just because the scholar doesn't like the fact that he got corrected on the error.

      It should certainly raise eyebrows, at any rate.

    • SadieDog

      – used in a sentence , The truth about Fukushima is being constrained.

  • hipparchos

    Jay Cullen has responded to the factual inaccuracies of this article, and has requested that take this article down.

    You can read Cullen's correction of the inaccuracies in this article on his Daily Kos blog posting, here:

    • SykeWar(DELETED) SykeWar

      Dailykos?! Who the hell here would have anything to do with Dailykos? The author said he tried to register to rebut what was said here and he didn't get the confirmation email. And he stated this like obviously it's the site's fault and we got here through some vast right wing conspiracy.

    • SykeWar(DELETED) SykeWar

      Because it was stated on this site that some of the figures he provided "appeared" to be incorrect and not WAS incorrect, they got sand in their vaginas and are calling us all sorts of not nice names. I'm sure they'll be coming on here calling us all racists.

  • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

    Hippa, yes he corrects the information, which is worthless in time and energy, since the ocean and his sampling are meaningless. Anyone with a brain knows that the entire ocean, every square inch, along with every (all) current tract would have to be read at the exact same time for verifiable evidence of radiation flows and strengths reaching the west coast etc..

    No wonder they passed all the secrecy laws…this is not science.

  • Nick

    Time for a seance for science.

    Fukushima ain;t that bad. Shill enough and folks will forget science and revert to superstition.

    Methinks we is already at that point.

    So why bother to spend zillions on cancer research?

    Isn't most of what scientists do all for naught from here on?

    If the corporate world decides our fate, why not just read your daily horoscope instead of ENENEWS?

    Fukushima is about how even the scientific method can become suspect.

    So why bother?

    Point is, MOST people don't have the cojones to deal with reality, so they make up their own. Just like TEPCO and much of Japan.

    Sick ecosystems? What? Do economists systematically get sick of science? Yup.

  • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

    Pretty sure this statement started in 1945 with the Trinity Bomb Test! 🙁

    "Fukushima is about how even the scientific method can become suspect."

    • Gasser Gasser

      Stephen Wolf; The Pusher Man

      Go here first for the gist


      You know I've burned a lot of generator gas
O' Lord, I've paid a lot of Coal energy bill’s

But I never touched nothin’
That my wallet couldn't kill

You know, I've seen a lot of people walkin' ‘round
With Plutonium tombstones in their eyes

      But the Nuclear Shill pusher don't care
Ah, if you live or if you die

      God damn, The Nuclear Shill Pusher's 

      God damn, I say the Uranium Pusher’s

I said God damn, God damn
      The NRC Pusher men

      You know the Wind and Solar dealer, these dealer's are men
With natural power being none polluting they send

Oh but the IAEA Nuclear pusher's are monster's

      Good God, their not natural men

The natural power dealer for a nickel

      Lord, will sell you lots of sweet electricity dreams

Ah, but the Nuclear pusher ruin your body
Lord, he'll leave your, he'll leave your Cesium mind to scream

      God damn, the Nuclear Pusher’s
God damn, God damn the Uranium Pusher’s

I said God damn, God, God damn
      The NRC Pusher men

      Well, now if I were a wiser president of this land
You know, I'd declare total war on the Nuclear Pusher men

I'd haul their ass's to the Hague , and I'd jail them if they try run

      Yes I'd expose'em on and Twitter, not for fun

      God damn

      The NRC Nuclear Pusher’s
Gad damn The TEPCO Pusher’s

I said…

    • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

      Nuclear Crimes and the scientific method/theory! 🙁

      • Sam Sam

        Appreciate the follow through on this. Look what the Age pf
        Enlightenment brought us with the Scientific Method. God
        Damn the Nuclear Pusher Man using the Scientific Method.

        I would trade any day all the progress of our current civilization
        and go back to the Stone Age if we could put the Genie of Nuclear
        back into the bottle.

        • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

          Finding the Genie inside the bottle was one thing.

          Letting the Genie out of the bottle was another thing. 🙁

          Allowing the Genie to run about the planet without a chaperon was idiotic! 🙁

          Then allowing the Genie to have babies all over the Earth's surface was insane. 🙁

          Looks like we humans granted this Nuclear Genie his/her very own 3 wishes… 🙁

      • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar anne

        TY, Obewan
        Deception, Cover-up and Murder in the Nuclear Age

        • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

          anne, you are welcomed. 🙂

          If any human truly wants to understand the "scientific method" used for this Nuclear Technology Folly then the link I provided will keep them busy reading and catching up, all while they cry like a baby. 🙁

          The end result is always the same for any biological life subjected to this technologies released Radiation Contamination poisons where ever they are/may be encountered! 🙁

          = More cancer and diseases for everybody effected/exposed!

          Enlightenment = Knowing the Truth!

  • Sam Sam

    God Damn Nuclear Pusher Man!

    Brilliant Gasser

    What about lyrics to Sony and Cher The Beat Goes On
    with themes of ongoing cover ups and pusher men
    keep on coming like zombies from the dead zone.

  • Jakobi Jakobi

    Have you guys read this yet? What do you think? (and don't shoot the messenger!):

    He never mentions little things like plutonium, uranium, or the potential criticality event that we are facing… Perhaps he's right about other points, or perhaps he's just another [pseudo]skeptic.

  • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

    Read a similar article in Scientific American and we should understand science promotes science. Cancer rates have skyrocketed since 1945 and after the application of Nuclear Technology around the globe.

    If Japan has a population of 127,000,000 and for every 3 people that die one dies form cancer that means 31,750,000 people alive in Japan today will eventually die from cancer. 🙁

    What happened to Japan in 1945 and how many Nuclear Reactors were installed on their island?

    After 9-11 the emergancy workers were told the air was safe and now all involved have health complications and/or cancer. Radiation signatures were found on the 9-11 site in the rubble.

    So now, who are you going to believe?

  • Sam Sam

    Another typical pronuker doublespeak
    article. What do you think about it?
    Where do you think he is as you say
    "right about other points."

    Not sure at this moment if you are
    of the ProNuker cult. Welcome to
    the playground. Need to learn more
    about what you think about this

  • SamuelRose

    It seems disingenuous to be focused on the tide bringing in contaminants. When the ocean evaporates, the humid air wafts in and largely precipitates where? The Rocky Mountains.

    Consider the story link below which describes rainborne deposits which can be wiped off a surface after a fresh rain. The wipes are then placed near a radiation meter, and found to have HIGH or DANGEROUS levels.

    A lot of this concentrated radioactivity can be attributed to radon progeny in the decay chain. But the big question is, can all of it? It seems remarkable if so, that merely wiping down your car after a rain is enough to create a dangerously radioactive artifact! Can we no longer drink fresh rainwater?

    Here is the link:

    • Ontological Ontological

      They are busy passing local laws that prohibit drinking or even collecting rain water in a barrel. I know sad, but they have known the rain is toxic, Has been for years, now extreme radiation. Thanks for the post. As a kid I used to wonder if mosquitoes were sensitive to radiation. We had an observatory where in the season you could hear them whine while in flight everywhere all around! Extinction rates ever increasing world wide, and now Fukushima. I tell people on the close 'em all now issue, any new major accidents in the future will only add to a problem that is already bad enough.

      • Hmmm… I wouldn't mind one bit if mosquitoes went extinct. And ticks. And several other ridiculously nasty-looking blood-sucking pests. Doing the extermination with radiation isn't very well targeted, and will kill far too many life forms we like and need. Sort of like DDT, but worse.

  • To all visitors and the community of ENENews, the following Japan Radiation Citizen Memos are designed to be widely shared everywhere in your local and internet communities. All citizens need to know about Fukushima. Find bulletin boards in your local area and post on social websites. Tell the People.

    Japan Radiation Memo to All Citizens PDF

    Japan Radiation Memo in JPEG (for social media upload)

    Vital1's Radiation Memo to Parents

    Doesn't take much. A printer. Scissors. Thumbtacks. For some,
    only a computer. And the simple motivation to share your care.

    It is also requested that everyone who can, please "like" and "share" ENENews throughout your use of social media

    A Santa Barbara, CA doctor who ate the blue fin tuna, courageously sets an exciting example as he informs of Fukushima

    ☢ Perils of Fukushima ☢ News A Wake-up Call From Dr. Stephen Hosea

    Mobilizing a global effort to fix the escalating nuclear catastrophe in Japan

    If not you, then who? Please tell the People

    Rad individual solutions

  • In its entirety, my response to Cullen's DKos bent-nose diary (in several parts, sorry for length, but I was only going to reply once) –

    Oh come now, Jay. Your professorial nose gets bent way too easily. Enenews is an aggregator site, with occasional admin-generated observations in the short synopses offered to the links. Sources may or may not be solid, that's for the reader to decide. By going to the links. Comments may or may not be useful or utterly inane, depends on the commenter. Sort of like here, but with a lot more tin foil. [Shrug.] It's not that difficult to gage what a website is and who participates, deal or not deal accordingly. Are we not adults?

    You wanted to argue in your original diary when I pointed out the error you believed Buesseler couldn't possibly be wrong about. Polonium-210 is #10 on the list, not #1. I even explained WHY it's always going to remain down the list. This was information you didn't previously know, but I did. You just believed what Buesseler said, and I called you – and him – on a very obvious error. That has since been corrected. Good, it's the right thing to do.

    You also wanted to argue that cesium can't bioaccumulate because it's biological half-life was too short. Despite my offering of link upon link to research into the long-known phenomenon of cesium bioaccumulation. I'm glad you're thinking differently about that now too.


  • (Continued…)

    You chose to change the m<sup>3</sup> designation to Bq/L in your presentation enenews took issue with, you say because liters are more familiar to people. That's garbage when talking about the volume of the Pacific Ocean (people don't drink it, you know), and pretty much the same thing as throwing curies, becquerels, cpm and sieverts vs. rem around just to confuse things. Because that kind of confusion has worked so well for so long to keep people overwhelmed with factors of ten in All Things Nuclear.

    You did say that strontium would be an issue if there were any, which you didn't look for in your samples, presumably because your 'helpers' in the nuclear industry claimed there wasn't any. We all know better than that now, don't we?

    You've been selling a deception that both the nuclear industry and the governments of more than a few nations (including ours) wish to spread widely in order to save important industrial/food supply segments of their economies. The deception will end up killing people, though everyone in industry and government who knows that is willing to absorb the population losses over time.

  • (Continued…)

    …Depersonalizing it statistically – what industries and governments do with "Cost-Benefit Analyses" – doesn't make it less of a moral and ethical offense. But you (and all the oceanographic et al.s doing the sampling/testing work) didn't even do that much. You've simply asserted that it's not dangerous and will probably never be dangerous. To anyone or anything.

    There is no 'scientific consensus' about this. Many scientists and engineers with as many or more sheepskins as you say just the opposite. Who is the public supposed to believe, and what makes that belief anything other than mere belief-in?

    We NEED someone to keep close track of the contamination, and we NEED our government agencies to protect us from the damage it will cause. We need factual data and honest assessments from people who know, on both sides of the 'consensus' divides for all of it. Attempts to deceive us into happily eating high-level nuclear waste for dinner just might motivate us to decide for ourselves that we don't NEED any of you.

    I am not eating Pacific seafood anymore. Others all over the world may decide they won't eat it either. Our choice. Telling us we're stupid for not eating it is pointless. Deliberately deceiving us is infuriating. You will have to grow a thicker skin if you want to sell deceptions for a living, because there are lots of folks out there who will take issue.

    I'm one of 'em.

  • zogerke zogerke


    • You're welcome, zogerke. Cullen's first diary in November came wrapped in the ridiculous Buesseler error. The reaction to my correction (polonium-210 is NOT the most common radionuclide in the oceans) drew such an absurd amount of self-important bluster that it honestly blew me away. Whoa. And they want to call this "science"?!?

      …then they'd damned well better grow some thicker skin. Not being radiation 'experts' of any variety, I can easily understand them not knowing this. I can even understand being misled by some up-to-no-good dastardly nukes paying for the privilege. I can not understand not looking up the very most basic data before you published, or fighting about it in public with someone who does know better once it's out there. That's just plain dumb.

      It's not about arguing interpretations of data, per what it supposedly "means." It's about the data. If your data has been skewed wrongly by a sneakily inserted lie, all it "means" is that you've bought a lie and everything underneath it needs serious re-examination. Other lies and misconceptions are likely to be there because you were dumb enough to buy the first one wholesale. Self-preservation alone should have taught them that by now.

      I find it sad that the learning opportunity has been squandered by oversized egos. Ah, well. You'll have this…

      • zogerke zogerke

        joy: squandered by oversize egos, sure, but how about also the political pressure to downplay? and keep it safe while looking good?

        • I honestly don't know whether these folks were subjected to political pressure beforehand. You'd have to ask them about that. And honestly, from the papers I've read (and the errors in data points later sold to the public), it looks to me a lot like they were under some hefty thumbs at the time and didn't even know where they were being manipulated.

          They aren't radiation specialists, no matter how carefully their samples get tested. For that, they need radiation specialists. Who aren't always trustworthy, unfortunately.

  • pjrsullivan

    To bring a proper charge against the high contracting parties to this continuing poisoning on out of our environment would require a grand jury to hear the allegations and make a call.

    Is it a case of aggravated heinous battery using a nuclear chemical that is a mutagenic, carcinogenic toxin? Is this an instance of attempted murder? How about attempted genocide?

    The weak point of this legal question is, we do not have the authority to issue our own money. The people who built these machines of genocide, are holding our purse.

    To get hold of the issue of money, labor will need to STRIKE THEM OUT.

    Can we ask ourselves, "Are they establishing a poison fist here? Could this mass poisoning be anything other than intentional?

    Might they be setting us right to take out the atmosphere?

    Might we not be facing the abomination of desolation here?