Radiation Expert: Horrific health toll from Fukushima — “Impossible not to be moved by scale of deaths and suffering” — Thousands to die of cancer and that’s just the tip of the iceberg — Number of dead babies significantly increased in many areas of Japan — Government actions unconscionable (AUDIO)

Published: August 28th, 2015 at 9:59 am ET


Dr Ian Fairlie, radiation biology expert educated at Princeton Univ. who has worked for the UK government and European Parliament (pdf), Aug 2015 (emphasis added): … the human toll from Fukushima is horrendous: 2,000 Japanese people have died from the evacuations and another 5,000 are expected to die from future cancers… Recently, Dr Alfred Körblein from Nuremburg in Germany noticed a 15% drop (statistically speaking, highly significant) in the numbers of live births in Fukushima Prefecture in December 2011… He also observed a (statistically significant) 20% increase in the infant mortality rate in 2012… The official widely-observed policy is that small amounts of radiation are harmless: scientifically speaking this is untenable… the Japanese Government is  attempting to increase the public limit for radiation in Japan from 1 mSv to 20 mSv per year… This is not only unscientific, it is also unconscionable… In sum, the health toll from the Fukushima nuclear disaster is horrendous… The Fukushima accident is still not over and its ill-effects will linger for a long time into the future. However we can say now that the nuclear disaster at Fukushima delivered a huge blow to Japan and its people… It is impossible not to be moved by the scale of Fukushima’s toll in terms of deaths, suicides, mental ill-health and human suffering. Fukushima’s effect on Japan is similar to Chernobyl’s massive blow

Dr Fairlie, Aug 20, 2015: Fukushima… Thousands More Will Die… [It’s] difficult for lay people and journalists to understand what the real situation is… The 2013 UNSCEAR Report has estimated that the collective dose to the Japanese population from Fukushima is 48,000 person Sv: this is a very large dose… it can be reliably estimated… that about 5,000 fatal cancers will occur in Japan in future from Fukushima’s fallout… Plus similar (unquantified) numbers of radiogenic strokes, CVS diseases and hereditary diseases

Rossiya Segodnya (Russian gov’t news agency) – Sputnik, Aug 20, 2015: Unspoken Death Toll of Fukushima: Nuclear Disaster Killing Japanese Slowly — The Japanese government is still in denial and refuses to recognize the disastrous consequences of the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe, London-based independent consultant on radioactivity Dr. Ian Fairlie states, adding that while thousands of victims have already died, thousands more will soon pass away. According to… Fairlie, the health toll from the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe is horrific… an estimated 5,000 will most likely face lethal cancer in the future, and that is just the tip of the iceberg. What makes matters even worse, the nuclear disaster and subsequent radiation exposure lies at the root of the longer term health effects, such as cancers, strokes… hereditary effects and many more.

Alfred Korblein, MD, former Sr. Scientist at Munich Environmental Institute & Univ. of Bremen professor, Nov 2014: … infant mortality in 7 prefectures near Fukushima is significantly increased in 2012… with a maximum in May… [My Feb 2014 study] compared infant mortality rates in… the prefectures Fukushima, Iwate, Miyagi, Gunma, Tochigi, Ibaraki and Chiba, with the rates in the rest of Japan… A significant 25% increase was found in the first 9 months of 2012… There is a highly significant 91% increase of infant mortality in March 2011… likely an immediate effect of the earthquake and tsunami.

Dr. Korblein, Feb 2014: After the Fukushima nuclear disaster in March 2011, infant mortality rates in the most  radioactively-contaminated Prefectures around Fukushima increased… The  increase is statistically significant. In December 2011, nine months after the accident, a highly significant 10% drop in live births occurred… First evaluations of the monthly data for infant mortality rates in Japan after Fukushima showed significant peaks in May and December 2011. In addition, an Analysis of the numbers of live births in Fukushima Prefecture found a highly significant 15% decrease in December 2011…

See also: Full interview with Fairlie which aired on last week’s ‘Nuclear Hotseat’ here

Published: August 28th, 2015 at 9:59 am ET


Related Posts

  1. Report: Mortality rising in contaminated regions of East Japan — “Very likely the number of cases of disease and death increased associated with radiation” July 9, 2012
  2. Strange TV interview with pro-nuclear professor on study finding increased infant mortality in US after Fukushima (VIDEO) January 25, 2012
  3. TV: Surge in babies being born with extra arms, legs after Fukushima — “I feel officials know the cause is radiation” — Nurse says many are getting abortions to avoid ‘inconvenient’ babies — “High number of stillbirths” — Many people reporting cancers, even far away from Fukushima (VIDEO) April 18, 2016
  4. New study reveals deaths and mutations ”increased sharply’ from exposure to Fukushima contamination, “especially at low doses” — ‘Small’ levels of cesium may be ‘significantly toxic’ — Smithsonian: “In other words, things don’t look good for the animals living around Fukushima” May 15, 2014
  5. Sailor talks Fukushima’s Impact on Pacific: “It’s dead… for thousands of miles there was nothing” between US & Japan — “Like sailing in a dead sea… everything’s all gone” — “Just talking about it makes me feel like I want to cry” — “No birds, no fish, no sharks, no dolphins, no turtles, nothing” (AUDIO) October 23, 2014

1,127 comments to Radiation Expert: Horrific health toll from Fukushima — “Impossible not to be moved by scale of deaths and suffering” — Thousands to die of cancer and that’s just the tip of the iceberg — Number of dead babies significantly increased in many areas of Japan — Government actions unconscionable (AUDIO)

  • We Not They Finally

    Bucky ballsw hich has been named after Buckminster Fuller is the latest end of life on earth possibility. The idea of nearly weightless deadly radiation moving with grease fast speed from Fukeshima to the west coast of the USA makes me think that as the ingrediants will soon be lofted high into our atmosphere and go all over the world deadly radiation for the whole world.

  • rogerthat

    off topic, but this guy knows his oats:


    August 31, 2015
    If You Need to Reduce Risk, Do it Now

    John P. Hussman, Ph.D.

  • rogerthat


    Documentary captures anti-nuclear protest movement’s evolution via The Japan Times
    In the summer of 2012, tens of thousands of people gathered around the prime minister’s office with one message — no more nuclear power. People flooded the streets of Tokyo’s Nagatacho district, chanting and holding up signs saying “No Nukes!” in the hope their voices could be heard.

    It is a moment historical sociologist Eiji Oguma has captured in his debut documentary film, “Tell the Prime Minister,” which will start screening at Uplink cinema in Shibuya on Sept. 2.

    “This movement is extremely important for the modern history of Japan — even the world,” Oguma says. “I had been following the demonstrations and I knew that I wanted to record it someway or another.”

    The film documents the fledgling rallies that began to appear soon after the March 2011 nuclear disaster at the Fukushima No. 1 power plant and traces their growth into a unified protest movement. The footage shows participants from all walks of life marching through the streets dressed in colorful costumes and carrying balloons. Live music fills the air.

    “I didn’t think the protests would develop into something like this,” Oguma says. “What attracted me most to this movement was that nothing happened the way I thought it would.”
    […] …

    • rogerthat

      All of the footage of the protests was provided by the owners free of charge. Oguma surfed online and found about five hours worth of footage he wanted to use, and then edited it down to an hour. Oguma then reached out to the videos’ owners and most happily agreed to let him use their footage. In addition, Oguma and Shunichi Ishizaki, editor of the documentary, conducted their own interviews of former Prime Minister Naoto Kan and activist Misao Redwolf, among others. Oguma, a professor at Keio University, has written many books, but this is the first time he has stepped into the world of film.

      “There are some things that are hard to express with words and that is why I wanted to make a film,” Oguma says. “I wanted to create something that showed the beauty of the movement that had come to life.”

      Although not as sizable, anti-nuclear protests are still being organized every Friday in Nagatacho. Oguma notes that the March 11 disaster became a turning point for Japan’s protest movement. And today, tens of thousands of people are gathering around Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s office to oppose security bills that would enable Japan to change the interpretation of the Constitution to execute collective self-defense.

      “A new style of protest was born by coincidence and it is continuing to this day,” Oguma says. “It is a show of the country’s creativity.”

      Read more.

  • rogerthat


    Japan’s Nuclear Clean-Up: Jimmy Carter and Fukushima via The Economist
    April 2, 2011

    Workers who were already facing deadly radiation exposure were forced to sleep on a floor with barely enough to eat and drink, until the Japanese media exposed their terrible conditions. Some workers were sent into the toxic plant without basic protective gear like rubber boots, and needed to be hospitalised. On April 1st the government revealed that the plant’s operator, TEPCO, had not even provided dosimeters—small, inexpensive badges that record radiation exposure—to all workers.

    The fear and danger is beyond comprehension for most people, and in particular the political leaders who must order men in to danger. But interestingly, it is not unfamiliar to former American president Jimmy Carter. Nearly half a century ago, as a young naval officer, he led a 23-man team to dismantle a reactor that, like Fukushima, had partially melted down.

    The reactor in Chalk River, Canada, about 180 kilometres (110 miles) from Ottawa, was used to enrich plutonium for America’s atomic bombs. On December 12th 1952 it exploded, flooding the reactor building’s basement with millions of litres of radioactive water. Lieutenant Carter, a nuclear specialist on the Seawolf submarine programme, and his men were among the few people with the security clearance to enter a reactor. From Schenectady, New York, they rode the train up and got straight to work…

    • rogerthat

      “The radiation intensity meant that each person could spend only about ninety seconds at the hot core location,” wrote Mr Carter in “Why Not the Best?“, an autobiography published in 1975 when he was campaigning for the presidency.

      The team built an exact replica of the reactor on a nearby tennis court, and had cameras monitor the actual damage in the reactor’s core. “When it was our time to work, a team of three of us practised several times on the mock-up, to be sure we had the correct tools and knew exactly how to use them.

      ''Finally, outfitted with white protective clothes, we descended into the reactor and worked frantically for our allotted time,” he wrote. “Each time our men managed to remove a bolt or fitting from the core, the equivalent piece was removed on the mock-up.”

      “For several months afterwards, we saved our feces and urine to have them monitored for radioactivity. We had absorbed a year’s maximum allowance of radiation in one minute and twenty-nine seconds. There were no apparent after-effects from this exposure—just a lot of doubtful jokes among ourselves about death versus sterility,” Mr Carter wrote.

      The men at Fukushima face similar risks. Some 21 workers have been exposed to more than 100 millisieverts of radiation, the maximum permissible during an emergency, according to Japan’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA). As a result, NISA raised the limit to 250 millisieverts for plant workers. …

      • rogerthat

        At 500 millisieverts the exposure begins to have detectable effects on health.

        In 2008, when Mr Carter was 83, he was asked if he had been scared. The former president grew quiet and, speaking very deliberately, replied: “We were fairly well instructed then on what nuclear power was, but for about six months after that I had radioactivity in my urine. They let us get probably a thousand times more radiation than they would now. It was in the early stages and they didn’t know.” The account, from Arthur Milnes, a journalist and historian at Queen’s University in Canada, appears in a book published last month, “Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter: A Canadian Tribute” (McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2011). “I learned the dangers,” said Mr Carter.

        People close to Mr Carter credit his Chalk River experience for his decision not to develop a neutron bomb and to restrict plutonium enrichment to prevent nuclear proliferation. And it is considered one of the principal reasons he took quick, precautionary actions during the Three Mile Island reactor crisis, which occurred two years into his presidency.

        As for the Chalk River disaster itself, some of today’s reactor safety features came out of the incident, such as a system for independent, fast shutdowns that is separate from the regular reactor controls.

        Read more.

  • rogerthat


    How comic books helped fuel Japan’s love for the atom via Aljazeera

    Characters such as Astro Boy extolled benefits of nuclear energy, exacerbating the shock when disaster struck in 2011. …

  • rogerthat

    not a happy camper:


    Inspection over planned Fukushima waste disposal sites postponed

    An Environment Ministry official faces people of the northeastern Japan town of Kami on Aug. 31, 2015, who requested the government suspend an inspection related to building a disposal site there for waste from the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. Inspections were postponed at three candidate construction sites, including Kami. (Kyodo)


  • rogerthat


    Guest Opinion: Idahoans should demand accountability on nuclear waste
    August 29, 2015

  • rogerthat

    Reader Comment: Otter Ought Not Accept Nuclear Deal

    August 30, 2015 Jan Wimberley

    Why should Idaho accept nuclear waste from Virginia? Virginia built the plant. Let Virginia store the waste.

    The Department of Energy and it’s for-profit-contractor Battelle and Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter want to raise the limits of the 1995 agreement. Some people don’t know the hours and work which went into this agreement with input from Idaho citizens.

    Former Govs. Cecil Andrus and Phil Batt have both spoken against the new closed-doors dealings. Batelle has much more waste to dispense with than the amount it is pushing for, and no doubt will deal for excessive dumping once the present law is infringed.

    Big money will come to Idaho by way of tempting us to accept this waste. Our water is our livelihood! Our health is more valuable than that kind of big money.

    For an interesting exercise, look up what radiation poisoning does to the body. Radioisotopes do not dissipate short term.

    These pollutants will affect our soils, our water, our animals, and Idahoans for generations.

    I sure don’t want them buried in my ‘back yard’ at INL. Idaho has porous lava tubes and caverns and rock.

    Storage facilities break down, and the Hanford site is an environmental and health disaster — costly to the state of Washington. …

  • rogerthat

    The Tooth Fairy Project discovered children living within a 50 mile radius of nuclear plants had Strontium 90 in their baby teeth. Some people move to Idaho because we have the distinction of having no nuclear power plants.

    Let the nuclear industry go out of business for lack of dumping places. Even foreign countries are now finally refusing our nuclear waste. They woke up!

    Speed your sentiments at governor@gov.idaho.gov and please join me in alerting friends and family members to hold state officials to the law already in place. This is now and critical.

    Jan is a Clinical Nutrition Consultant with a background in environmental toxicity.

  • rogerthat

    70 years on, britain's sick joke is alive and well:


    Compensation for Britain's nuclear test victims promised by three Labour leadership candidates

    Veterans were exposed to tests in the 1950s and now their children suffer 10 times the normal rate of birth defects…

  • rogerthat

    can of worms:


    Understand ‘residual risk’ for nuclear safety

    August 30, 2015
    By George Apostolakis / Special to The Japan News

    … In summary, it is not meaningful to say that an activity or facility is safe or unsafe. The proper way to say it is that the residual risk is tolerable or acceptable given the benefits that are derived from this activity or facility. The NRRC is helping Japanese utilities to accurately quantify the residual risk from nuclear power plants so that measures can be taken to reduce it to as small a number as possible.

    Apostolakis is head of the Nuclear Risk Research Center (NRRC) of the Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry, and a professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He is a former commissioner of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

  • rogerthat


    Exelon mulling closure of unprofitable Quad Cities nuclear plant, decision due by Oct. 1

    By TAMMY WEBBER Associated Press
    August 30, 2015

    … Exelon is asking legislators to approve a monthly surcharge on consumers' electricity bills that would generate about $300 million annually to help keep unprofitable plants open. …

    • melting mermaid melting mermaid

      The population pays to poison themselves and the ridiculous ceo Christmas bonuses. Yeah. Sounds like democracy. If they say no will the pronuke people ridicule and blackmail them? Use their handy dandy state power and militant police to force the poor people of Illinois to pay for random premeditated murder. How nukie of them.

      • Ya, pay us highly to kill your kids….nukists and socipaths have no shame. No conscience

        • melting mermaid melting mermaid

          Can the public charge the nuketards a monthly surcharge that can help pay the medical bills of all the children they've effected with their legal, but deadly effluents?

          • Maybe I send them an invoice…..

          • melting mermaid melting mermaid

            Do you think I can afford to pay a babysitter to take care of my terminally ill child? Think again. They don't mind destroying lives as long as it turns a profit. It's criminal. The nuclear industry should be shut down, liquidated and given to the child victims of their nefarious hubris. But justice isn't going to be enough, I'm afraid. The earth is broke! And they are responsible.

            • Angela_R

              "Do you think I can afford to pay a babysitter to take care of my terminally ill child?"

              Oh MM, I only sat through that for ten days and then my child was called to peace, to rest for a while.
              But you have lived and endured for so much longer.

              • melting mermaid melting mermaid

                "I am ready. The stream has reached the sea, and once more the great mother holds her son against her breast…this day has ended. It is closing upon us even as the water-lily upon it's own tomorrow. What was given us here we shall keep, and if it suffices not, then again must we come together and together stretch our hands unto the giver. Forget not that I shall come back to you. A little while, a moment of rest upon the wind, and another woman shall bear me…You have sung to me in my aloneness, and I of your longings have built a tower in the sky. But now our sleep has fled and our dream is over, and it is no longer dawn. The noontide is upon us and our half waking has turned to fuller day and we must part. If in the twilight of memory we should meet once more, we shall speak again together and you shall sing to me a deeper song and if our hands shall meet in another dream we shall build another tower in the sky." The Prophet, KB

                • Angela_R

                  MM, that is beautiful and because of your search I believe you will succeed in finding peace for your family and yourself.

                  in 'A little while'

                  • melting mermaid melting mermaid

                    Thanks, AR. In my head I saw you singing that deeper song in our twilight of memory.

                    • Angela_R

                      I see that as a beautiful compliment MM, thank you.

                      Suspect I was in training, destined to be a mother. Tried to be, from the age of five. I attempted to mother adults – long, long story.

                      My greatest pleasure though, would be to gather the 'children' to greet their

  • If the ocean's radioactivity is bad, then why do turtles live 300 years.

    Except now they have boatloads of tumors and such…..

    • bo bo

      That's why it's a trap when people keep banging pots and pans saying all radiation, in any amount is bad. There is a fallacy to the logic.

      Each isotope behaves completely differently, and in particular natural primordial K40 – as an integral part of potassium – is necessary for cell health.

      That needs to be hammered home or we allow Buesseler to waltz to victory each time he says '7.7 Bq/cubic meter of radioactivity from cesium found in Cali coast.. oh well, but the ocean naturally has 12000bq/cubic meters from naturally.. so in comparison that additional 7.7 is negligible!'
      That's like saying 2+2=5

      Trying to counter that defense from Buesseler with 'but most of that 12000bq/cubic meter you claim is *natural* – isn't. It's from post atomic fallout. It's a coverup!'

      • bo bo

        ↑ Please disregard the above post.
        Sentences appeared in wrong order due to bad cut/paste job. 🙁

        I meant this in response to stock :

        That's why it's a trap when people keep banging pots and pans saying all radiation, in any amount is bad. There is a fallacy to the logic.

        Each isotope behaves completely differently, and in particular natural primordial K40 – as an integral part of potassium – is necessary for cell health.

        That needs to be hammered home or we allow Buesseler to waltz to victory each time he says '7.7 Bq/cubic meter of radioactivity from cesium found in Cali coast.. oh well, but the ocean naturally has 12000bq/cubic meters from naturally.. so in comparison that additional 7.7 is negligible!'

        Trying to counter that defense from Buesseler with 'but most of that 12000bq/cubic meter you claim is *natural* – isn't. It's from post atomic fallout. It's a coverup!' →That's like saying 2+2=5
        It's a set up to ensure a lost debate.

        • bo bo

          & to be clear, I do not think any radioactivity from any manmade radioactive isotopes are safe AT ALL and many if not most radioactivity from 'natural' isotopes like uranium are also toxic.

          I'm just saying at the least – K40 just seem to behave so differently and unless we clarify that we won't win the debate against hormesis charlatans, and deniers & downplayers.

          • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

            Unfortunately there is manmade Potassium 40 which is the result of nuclear fission in the ocean and on the land no longer attached to stable potassium. This manmade Potassium 40 is around nuclear power plants and in coal ash and slag. In addition artificial chemical fertilizers are added to the soil in farming which is not organic, such as potassium nitrate.

            Tjere os at ;east 1.000 Bq/m^3 manmade Potassium-40 in the ocean since 1971. However, a huge amount was also added prior to 1971 from atom testing and nuclear accidents and nuclear waste dumpts in the ocean prior to 1971.

          • Angela_R

            "& to be clear, I do not think any radioactivity from any manmade radioactive isotopes are safe AT ALL"
            I agree.

            "and many if not most radioactivity from 'natural' isotopes like uranium are also toxic."

            Isolated from their balancing stable 'siblings' via the separation process,but even more so after undergoing attacks on their nucleus –
            that I would also agree with.

            Bo, your concern has been for your family and friends yet they close their ears and soldier on; after all what can they do…
            wish them peace,
            for that is what they want.

            I believe in miracles

            • bo bo

              Hi Angela and all who have been leaving personal messages on these walls I apologize for some for not responding.. this K40 took so much energy fot me to understand.. and I have ignored laundry dishes emails..

              Maybe I'm the one dunce who doesn't understand potassium and radiation but if you care about fukushima and you happen to be vague on potassium I urge you all to take a moment to review the info don't let your eyes glaze over..

              • bo bo

                And thank you, Angela, for the kind words.
                I wish you peace as well.

                • Angela_R

                  and Bo,
                  our wider, much larger family,

                  may we look forward to our gathering together.

                  If we wish, there is a wider never ending Universe, for us to explore.
                  Imagine the excitement

                  but for you, I suspect that your chief concern has been Justice.
                  Though, I believe you also earn extra 'brownie points' for your endeavours in a number of other areas.

                  • bo bo

                    Angela… thank you
                    I do not have lofty goals
                    My chief concern is SANITY

                    • Angela_R

                      Understood Bo.

                      Recently I received an Engineer's Report, in it there was an offer to provide a
                      water drainage maintenance program.

                      "Why" I asked, would I pay for such a service when it was caused by the misdirection of stormwater flow from other properties. The professional queried "Didn't you agree?"

                      "Agree?" I retorted, "Agree, to surface water coming downhill, then turning at a right angle, crossing at the lowest point of my property and finally attempting to run uphill into a pit provided by the Local Authority?"

                      I'm appalled by lies, I'm disgusted by cons,
                      and even dummy me knows,
                      'black is not white'

          • Death Lurking Death Lurking

            bo- When K-40, is "enriched potassium k40 " (man made nuclear isotope) it is dangerous to cells.

            Full story at this link, snippet below the link.


            From the blog:
            Nuclear authorities have used all sorts of justifications for their actions – the emission of nuclear effluent – over many decades. These justifications are all demonstrably false. As is, clearly, their propaganda concept of the “banana equivalent dose”.

            Similarly, the industry statement that it must redress what it alleges is a serious and negative “reduction” in natural background radiation for the sake of humanity – by increasing the rate of nuclear effluent emission – is clearly false.

            A primary dietary source of internal dose to life – K40, with it’s very dilute concentration, weak energy level, low rate of decay and long half life of 1.3 billion years, has in fact remained a constant equilibrium within the fabric of the body of Homo Sapiens throughout the species 200,000 year life on earth.

            Teller and the rest of the gang have left quite a bloody mess. And it’s getting worse. "

        • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

          “Both ionizing radiation and ultraviolet light may be carcinogenic. Ionising radiation may be electromagnetic (e.g., X-rays and gamma rays) and particulate (e.g. electrons, protons, neutrons, alpha particles, etc.). Exposure to ionizing radiation may result from manmade (e.g. therapy and imaging, nuclear industry) or natural sources. Radiation from natural sources is termed background radiation, and results from cosmic rays, radon, terrestrial radioisotopes (soil and rocks) and internal sources within the body (e.g. carbon-14 and potassium-40).
          “Ionising radiation causes DNA damage and is therefore mutagenic and potentially carcinogenic to any tissue in the body. Radiation damage may particularly lead to loss of DNA repair genes, and tumour suppressor genes. Further mutations, over a period of many years, may result in malignant transformation.
          “A single exposure to ionizing radiation may be sufficient to induce cncer. The odds of cancer induction depend on the dose and type of tissue irradiated. Myeloid cells are particularly sensitive to ionizing radiation, and breast, thyroid and lung are also vulnerable tissues. The ‘latency’ period between exposure and cancer induction also varies. For leukaemia, the average period is 7 years, whereas for solid malignancies it is usually at least 10 years
          “UV radiation exposure increases the risk of both non-melanoma skin cancers (NMSC) and melanoma. NMSDs may be induced by multiple exposures to UV (mainly UVB) light. The…

          • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

            mechanism involves damage to the p53 gene and DNA repair processes. Patients with xeroderma pigmentosum are less able to repair UV-induced DNA damage due to inherited defective DNA repair mechanisms and have a particularly high risk of multiple skin cancers after UV light exposure. Melanomas have been associated with a history of acute sunburn episodes rather than chronic exposure to sunlight, but no direct causal link is proven at present….”
            Concise Clinical Oncology, by Clive Peedell, BM, MRCP, FRCR, Consultant in 'clinical Oncology, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, 2005., Section one, Principles of Oncology, subsection "Radiation Carcinogenesis,” p. 17.

        • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

          bo, the one caveat is the wording of this sentence;
          "Each isotope behaves completely differently, and in particular natural primordial K40 – as an integral part of potassium – is necessary for cell health."

          Scientists will immediately deny this. They have already tidied up their concept of radiation as being either alpha beta or gamma, each with a well defined penetration and activity, the ionizing destruction. So a less controversial way to state this problem is that it appears that the biological effect of K-40 is not proportional to the risk given to it in the standard model. Or one could say, the biological impact from each isotope varies widely and apparently more than the 20x risk multiplication factors included in the sievert system.

          The other thing is that it hasnt been scientifically validated that the k-40 fraction is a biological requirement. This assumption (of mine) is mainly based on observation of the natural world. k-40 is there, its by far the largest source of radioactivity and yet life did fine with it.

          Because this radioactive isotope was incorporated in the cell since the beginning of life, (Even more of it back then) its likely that life built around it and even utilized it, rather than flourishing IN SPITE of it.

          To know for sure, we need a test that shows ANY health damage and another test that shows reduced health without the radiation. Tests do exist for the latter but the people here dont believe they are vali

      • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

        There were only 11,000 Bq/m^3 of Potassium-40 in the ocean in 1971. Since then there have been added at least 1,000 Bq/m^3 of man-made Potassium-40 which is not part of natural potassium, but a separate isotope created by nuclear fission from Chlorine-37. This is a huge amount of radiation, which in addition to 2000+ other radionuclides from Fukushima and elsewhere is killing all life in the Pacific Ocean and elsewhere.

        • bo bo

          Yes! I remember you corrected me on that data and you may have noticed I have cited that number since, with respect to your efforts, then both numbers 11000bq &12000bq after stock and ( & I thought Paveway ) had data that rounded to 12000bq ( which is a number Buesseler states publicly)

          To clarify, in the above post I omitted the '11000bq/cubic meters of primordial K40 radioactivity in the ocean' data that you supplied, not because I forgot but because in this particular instance I was specifically quoting Buesseler's claim.

          • bo bo

            But thank you for clarifying – now it is clearer to me..
            so.. you actually DO think ( and again feel very free to correct me if I am misinterpreting you) *at the least* 11000bq/per cubic meter of K40 radioactivity is actually from primordial K40, not from atomic era fallout?

            Because at first you seemed to say or at least hypothesize that most of that is adulterated data that includes post nuclear manmade stuff ( in fact in the very beginning of the discussion I recall you had said you would assume 90 or 95% of that would be manmade – again, feel very free to correct me if I am wrong or misquote)

            But now since you have supplied this specific number – 1000bq/cubic meter of *manmade* K40 to add on top of 11000bq/cubic meters , well, now I have confirmation that you perhaps also *do* believe the ocean actually is already quite radioactive and have been so, from before the atomic era..
            and that (again I am assuming here so correct me if I misinterprete) 11000bq/cubic meter data taken in 1971 was *not* adulterated with post atomic fallout ?

            That's awesome, I think we seem to be on the same page!
            albeit some minor ballpark differences in number ( Buesseler says 12000bq /cubic meters of primordial K, and 2000bq/cubic meter more of manmade K so actually his number of man made stuff is higher ) – the concept is aligned here.

            • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

              Not all of the 11,000 Bq/m^3 Potassium -40 in the ocean is primordial Potassium-40. This figure from 1971 includes man-made artificial Potassium-40 from nuclear fission dating from the 1930s when Germany was shipping uranium to Japan up until 1971. I have to search other sources which are from books and journals not on the internet, and I will update my findings as soon as I find them if any other figures are available.

              • bo bo

                Hmmmm ok – here is what I learned recently ( as in within the past 24 hrs)

                Apparently it's very easy to calculate and extract the exact amount of primordial K40 using something called anthrochronology – and so I'm assuming Buesseler used that method ( though I'm not exactly sure) – I wonder what method your 1971 study used ?

                But actually.. the tiny variances do not matter..

                Do you agree, PT, that the biggest source of radioactivity in the ocean still remains to be from natural K40, & if so, do you see code's point, that unless this is understood as scientific fact and is part of the debate narrative, we don't have a chance of victory against deniers ( well, at least I think he is a denier ) like Buesseler ?

                • bo bo

                  & to clarify & repeat & hammer it down to the ground so there are no gray areas:

                  Buesseler makes infuriating comments like this:

                  '7.7 Bq/cubic meter of radioactivity from cesium found in Cali coast.. oh well, but the ocean naturally has 12000bq/cubic meters from primordial K40 naturally.. so in comparison that additional 7.7 is negligible!'

                  If the anti nuclear camp counters that defense from Buesseler with shaky facts like:
                  'but… Buesseler's claim of 12000bq/cubic meter of *natural* radioactivity  in the ocean  – that data has got to be a lie!  Even if the numbers were true, *most* of that *has* to be post atomic fallout adulterating the data. It's a coverup!'
                  ( I hope when I say 'shaky fact' – it is clear I am not denying presence of human nuclear fallout in the ocean water, it's about the false assumption held by many people about overall ratio of natural vs. manmade)

                  →That's like saying 2+2=5
                  It ensures 100% failure in debates
                  & automatic disqualification.

                  THAT was what code was trying to get to.

                  • bo bo

                    And I leave 2 questions for you here –

                    1. Does ( at least this part of) code's point make sense to you ?
                    2 . Do you comprehend that he was pointing that out to *help* the antinuclear community fight the deceptions by the pronuclear shills more effectively  ?

                    Sorry for being annoying – I'm just turning every stone and moving this discussion one notch at a time.

                    • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

                      Much of what Code says sounds like socref or Rod Adams or some one from Rod Adams' blog.

                    • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

                      The scientific community has already won the argument about all radiation can cause cancer. This is the scientific consensus. Confusing the issues only benefits the pro-Nuke community which can't keep building nuclear reactors while BEIR VII is in place.

                    • bo bo

                      I see.
                      So the answer to my questions 1& 2
                      are both 'No'

                      ( again please correct me if I misinterprete)

                      Thank u. This is really helpful to know.

                      Now, what is your answer to the question :

                      'Do you agree, PT, that the biggest source of radioactivity in the ocean still remains to be from natural K40'

                      Thank u. One notch at a time.

                    • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

                      What we have to worry about are all the man made ionizing radioactive isotopes in the ocean. I suspect that in places in the ocean primordial Potassium-40 is not the most abundant isotope. How big are those places, I don't really know, but even one sample would be too much.

                      But to really answer the question about radioactivity, we would have to consider all the isotopes (2000+) and the specific activity of each isotope and add them all together. I doubt there is enough money in the world to do this. And it isn't the most important question.

                      Is there enough radioactivity in the ocean to kill off all marine life? The evidence of all the mass die offs and the number of dead marine creatures on the bottom of the ocean seem to indicate this.

                      One can argue about how many angels dance on the head of a pin? But do we really need this answer?

                      Radiation kills. More and more radiation kills more and more. There were released from Fukushima alone 429 lethal doses of radiation for each and every one of the 7.5 billion humans on the planet.

                      Can we afford to add any more artificial radiation to the environment? Only if someone wants to keep killing off more and more people.

                      I am against murder of even one person for any reason. I am against capital punishment and against a collective of people killing other people. So I am against all nuclear technology.

                    • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

                      PT, I really think you have missed the basis of Code's argument and I am not sure why you are struggling, since he has been very clear with his presentation/comments.

                      Natural radiation in some form has been on this planet from the beginning of time and we are all here and alive and well for the most part. None of this life present would have been possible without the natural radiation in our environment.

                      Codes point is that the manufactured by mankind radiation is much worse to all life than any of our natural radiation in form. This is not a tough concept to understand.

                      His point is if you argue that all radiation is bad then you cannot quantify the dangers and known genetic harm or the difference between manmade and/or natural radiation sources/actions.

                      His point is not only valid, but dead on concerning the battle with the Nuclear Cartel at present.

                      They claim all radiation is the same and therefor exposure to their fake created quantities are so small they are of no consequence and will do you no harm.

                      You lose this argument immediately in this case and they walk free to create more and build more Nuclear Power plants.

                      The distinction between the two types natural/organic versus the manmade and the damage it is doing is paramount to winning this battle.

                      You are being led somewhere by others and that is not logical considering your brilliant research mind.

                      The difference in these two radioactive sources organic vs manmade are huge.

                  • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

                    We don't have to answer Buessler. He can say what he wants. It doesn't change the truth which is that the Pacific Ocean is dying from many causes, but the worst blow is from the radiation from Fukushima and from nuclear accidents and reactors and weapons production around the globe.

                    The plutonium from Fukushima is 1000s of times worse than from Chernobyl. Nothing can change the fact about how much plutonium has been released from Fukushima.

                    p. 49
                    “…The doses to man from anthropogenic radionuclides in the marine environment are generally 1 to2 orders of magnitude less than the doses from such radionuclides in the terrestrial environment. …”

                    If there are 33 times as much K-40 around a nuclear reactor as in nature, there are places in the ocean where the manmade K-40 is 3.3 times higher than in nature.

                    The argument about all the K-40 in the ocean as being natural is erroneous. However, radioactive cesium, strontium-90 and plutonium are much more dangerous as individual isotopes.

                    Is the aggregate of potassium-40, the fact that there is so much more of it, a weighing in factor that the community should be paying much more attention to artificial potassium-40 created by nuclear fission?

                    The focus of the argument should be getting rid of nuclear energy immediately.

                    • bo bo

                      Ok, we don't have to answer Buesseler (the disinformation shill cited in almost every MSM Fukushima article)
                      I see.
                      I totally disagree with u on that – but ok, accept the disagreement – moving on to next question→

                      How about Gundersen ( whose good intentions I tend to generally trust )?

                      When Gundersen said ( I believe, in critique of WHOI /Buesseler – again correct me if I am wrong):

                      '7.7 Bq/cubic meters of Cesium was detected in California… that is a hell of a lot of radioactivity to call *negligible* ! '

                      & I do remember he actually took the effort in his presentation to say also this:
                      '7.7 Bq/cubic meters of cesium… that means 7-8 atoms of cesium are disintegrating every SECOND in every cubic meter in the water!'

                      This statement ( it was in a presentation video) made ripples with authority and people were repeating
                      'Yes, it's high! Too high for comfort !'

                    • bo bo

                      Of course many people who follow this stuff understand cesium is far more toxic than the banana isotope…
                      But if laymen were told here, that the ocean has 12000bq/cubic meters of natural radiation to anyway, or ( even 'worse') that roughly 5000 atoms of K40 are disintegrating inside our bodies every second throughout our entire lifetime – just to maintain normal cell function – what would they think about 7.7 bq/cubic meter after THAT ? Do you think they'll slouch back into their couch and change the channel ? You bet.

                      When Gundersen says something like that to alarm the public of danger – I at least think it might be important to make sure that distinction between isotopes and its nonlinear relationship of radiation dose & toxicity are made. Moreover the linear relationship of radiation exposure dose / risk to health ( which for example someone like Fairlie stated clearly on nuclearhotseat that he believes in) might be reconsidered, edited, or, at the least, separated, isotope by isotope?

                    • bo bo

                      It does seem supremely important to not lump isotopes together in one basket, and I do think banging pots and pans & throwing general statements like 'radiation, any radiation is harmful in any amount' actually weakens the antinuclear movement. If u still can't comprehend this and are going to lump me, code, socref and Rod Adams together – so be it. I tried.

                      Thank you for reading and answering my questions.

                    • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

                      It is obvious that you are not a scientists. Are people plants or animals. You can definitely say that people are not plants. Are people mammals, yes.

                      If K-40 is present as a contaminant from nuclear fission, 4 out of 100,000 will receive a lethal cancer. This means that K-40 will always kill someone even if it is only 4 people out of 100,000.

                      The most vulnerable are the fetus, next are small babies, and girls are more vulnerable than boys.

                      You can argue theory all you want, but without citations from scientists in peer review journals who have collected data and received the criticism of other scientists, your theory is forever unsubstantiated.

                    • bo bo

                      PT -, you say:
                      'The argument about all the K-40 in the ocean as being natural is erroneous'

                      …Nobody said that anywhere.
                      Not me, code, stock, Paveway, MVB nor Buesseler.
                      We were all saying that the ocean actually has more radioactivity from primordial, supernova K40 than from manmade isotopes ( the existence of which nobody I just listed ever denied & Actually – Buesseler's numbers for manmade K40 is higher than the number you cite)

                      My question was simple –
                      'Do you agree, PT, that the biggest source of radioactivity in the ocean still remains to be from natural K40'

                    • bo bo

                      Just as a closing note – I was hoping to be nice about it to you & not corner it – but since you are again starting to attack – I am going to be blunt.

                      Your knowledge of K40 radioactivity in the ocean was totally wrong.
                      As I gradually clarified ( to myself ) in successive posts how presence of a huge amount of primordial K40 radioactivity was pretty much undeniable – you kind of quietly backtracked  from the initial unscientific reaction:

                      'But.. there's no way all that radioactivity in the ocean is from a natural source! I would imagine it's mostly manmade source!'

                      then later you slyly made it look like you knew all along. Admit it.. you actually did not have this info straight.

                      No, I am not a scientist,  I'm a layman. But I'm proud I actually comprehended at least that little  ( but crucial ) information about ocean radioactivity *slightly* before u, without formal scientific education or having taken many online courses in nuclear science.

                      I do think..before you branch out to figuring out CERN you might want to cover the basics first ?

                      Good day

                    • or-well

                      HAHAHA! "…before you branch out to figuring out CERN.." anne has it ALL figured out…in her mind… in little black and white cartoon stick figures…

                    • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

                      I have to spend time doing research for my own website so I can't answer any more questions.

                    • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

                      Here is the definition of radiation:
                      the emission of energy as electromagnetic waves or as moving subatomic particles, especially high-energy particles that cause ionization.

                      the energy transmitted by radiation, as heat, light, electricity, etc.
                      plural noun: radiations

                      If you want to spend your time arguing with the dictionary, be my guest.

                      The energy from radiation can damage a cell. The a single, damaged cell can form cancer.

                    • bo bo

                      Note – please edit my comment:

                      'Each isotope behaves completely differently'
                      to →
                      'THE BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FROM each isotope varies widely'

                      Thank you

                    • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

                      We have to answer the Buesseler/NOAA continually running video "our radioactive ocean" which compares natural to manmade radiation, thus "proving" Fukushima is no danger. Why? because without a good answer to this, you will lose each and every argument with scientist and disbelieving public. Along with losing the arguments, we will lose the earth. You really want to hold on to mistaken beliefs and fight phantom arguments, knowing that the stakes are so high? Its either a comprehension deficit or a big ego problem. Try more gingko biloba maybe

                  • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

                    bo: "… hammer it down to the ground so there are no gray areas…"

                    only brain washing hammers something down. And science always has to be open that new discoveries will change the previous perceptions of science. Science is about discovery. Science is about forming theories from data. New data can change the theories. New theories can explain better previous theories.

                    Science is an exploration. We have to consider past and present views and give credit to past scientists. Nothing can be discovered without the previous discoveries of other scientists.

                    On the other hand, we cannot just throw out previous data and previous discoveries. We cannot throw out data if it was accurate to begin with.

                    Buessler is only interested in tracing radionuclides which can be attributed to Fukushima because he is interested in ocean currents.

                    The separate isotope Potassium-40 created by nuclear fusion is ubiquotous as is natural potassium with its trace of natural potassium-40.

                    “..In fact, our biggest problem is filtering out natural radionuclides in our samples so we can measure the trace levels of cesium and other radionuclides that we know came from Fukushima….”

                • GOM GOM

                  With great risk to myself. There is no or little original [old stuff] K-AR in modern oceans. Any K would be mostly man-made and that is why the Pacific is dying. That, and other issues.

                  Although quite often I am seen as a dummy I shall continue anyway.

                  Any "measure" of anything natural to the Earth has to be done through Geochronology on a massive scale, using supercomputers. This technology is rather new and full of holes. And you can be sure the 'honest numbers" and results are hidden or misrepresented for political gain or whatever.

                  I have often said that Argon must be considered in dating methods. Now I will say this: Salinity is a major factor in the 'dating game'. Who on Earth could ever come up with accurate numbers?

                  Bo, the best way to understand the Earth's natural resources is Geology. It is easy to follow and understand. Like rings in the Grand Canyon tell our history.
                  Today, Earth's water is so polluted that science must look to deep trenches, rocks and formations fossils, seabed minerals, resources, ect..

                  I believe that nuclear has destroyed, and, is in the process of sealing our fate concerning the world ocean.
                  I also think we are rapidly headed to a Canfield Ocean state, it has begun.

                  • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

                    GOM, we covered this issue before and you were found dead wrong. Why do you continue? Besides the tiny bit of k-40 produced by mans fission operations, ALL the k-40 and AR-40 is primordial. You lack of ability to grasp this means further explanation is likely futile. Instead of mucking up this idea with tangents, why not constrain yourself to other subjects? Ive been trying to make a point for a long time, a simple point, and nobody seems to be getting it. How is this even possible? Anyway, Im hoping that unless anyone has GOOD DATA or GOOD POINTS to add to this discussion they talk about other things. Then they can return to the issue after its been given a fair shake. Thanks

            • bo bo

              For a moment there I thought you were saying that if the ocean is radioactive, most of that *has* to be from manmade sources.

              I personally *just* finally got that that is a misconception, just in the past few days.
              Even today, the biggest source of radioactivity is from the primordial 'supernova' K40 within potassium.

              I *almost* didn't get this concept, and got so deeply confused because of differing opinions being offered on these pages – but msny thanks to the patience of knowledgeable posters here, now I get it.

              Seems like you've known this all along, too! I know – It's only logical obvious.
              Anyways, glad everyone is on the same page now.

              • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

                The ocean is not homogeneous. Some places have much more manmade radioisotopes than others. I would strongly suspect that there are more radionuclides from nuclear fission in the water around Fukushima than there is natural potassium-40.

                What matters about the Pacific Ocean is the seafood there. I haven't eaten seafood since the early 1980s. Chernobyl was too much fallout. Simi Valley was too much fallout. Nuclear bomb testing was too much fallout, etc.

                If you want to know how much radiation has bioaccumulated in the fish, the fish much be tested. This is the real issue. The fish have been tested and they do contain plutonium. This is the most significant fact.

                All food and goods should be tested for radionuclides, both the food from the US and from all the other countries.

                I read that background radiation is natural radiation. With definition all the added radiation there are huge amounts of manmade radiation everywhere in the US. The ocean as a whole is 1 to 2 orders less by some estimates.

                We need to be concerned with the land and drinking water and the food grown on land the most. Arguing about the ocean is insignificant compared with the radioactive contamination of food grown on land. And fracking on land is also horrible and glysosphates are also horrible and GMOs. Everything altogether is killing the biosphere forever. Humans are not collecrtively wonder mutations.

                • HillbillyHoundDog HillbillyHoundDog

                  "Arguing about the ocean is insignificant compared with the radioactive contamination of food grown on land." PT

                  Oh Em Gee

                  I just had a revelation…


                  • bo bo

                    Hillbilly. . I totally disagree with u here

                    Buesseler and other pronukers wave this primordial K40 data to argue the opposite : that Fukushima is NOT killing the ocean ( 'Maybe a TAD, but not THAT much!!')

                    So I think.. it's supremely important that this info is straightened out..

            • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

              Im not sure the radioactivity from c-14 in obes link above is correct

              Point remains that life did well with so much natural radioactivity. Is k-40 half as dangerous as C-137? I dont think so!

              • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

                Where is the manmade K40?

                • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

                  oh, I get it obewan. Thanks for your many good posts, understanding and good vibes

                • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

                  Code, show me! 🙂

                  • DUDe DisasterInterpretationDissorder

                    Hi Code , i dont know if its ok to ask such a thing after all you done already, but the discussion has been long and is spread over places..

                    You think its possible to make a summarisation of every core conclusion you and others touched upon in this titanic queste..?

                    Such will help alot for every novice having to deal with the manmade nuclear hormesis BS drooling ann coulters of this world..to have a fundamental solid and scientific correct truth..

                    i wish i payed consequent attention from the beginning..including the dark matter and such..electrolyse..amount and stability of pottasium natural radiation..and everything else..

                    Maybe universities/scientist's can also use it to update their definitions / arguments and way of thinking/questioning dunno.. worth a shot i think..

                    Sorry i ask but's because i think you have gathered enough to set a new reasonable complete standard definition..

                    That can be understood and used by everyone..


                  • bo bo

                    & if anybody was reading this discussion from the sidelines rolling their eyes ( 'oh god.. typical enenews infighting!')
                    … well.. you know how people here often say things like 'if you care about this issue, take a moment to sign this petition..' etc.?

                    It's kind of like that – if you care about squashing nuclear energy.. but haven't paid attention to what happened in these threads here or didn't comprehend it.. I do urge those people to take a momemt to try to understand.
                    Several destroyed threads on enenews are of little concern compared to people comprehending this issue, or to a destroyed planet..

                    • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

                      The reason there is so much Potassium-40 around nuclear reactors is because Potassium-40 is produced from Chlorine 37 by nuclear fission.

                      Potassium 40 is produced with a beam of He4 ions with a target nuclide Cl-37 in a small medical cyclotron:
                      Journal of nuclear medicine, v. 21, no. 9
                      p. 869
                      Table 2:
                      Target nuclide Cl-37
                      Nuclear reaction 4He;n
                      Product K-40
                      Target nuclide Cl-35
                      Nuclear reaction 4He;n
                      Product K-38

                    • or-well

                      anne = fucking pro-nuke social media agent; four years of wallpapering, disrupting, accusing people, making absurd and vile ethnicity-based insinuations, finger-pointing anywhere and everywhere and diverting discussions with red herrings, misinfo and irrelevant mis-comparisons.
                      A small research cyclotron can NOT be compared with a commercial nuclear reactor.
                      Paveway put it well but missed the stinking intention factor – "PavewayIII
                      August 31, 2015 at 7:07 pm
                      I'm getting that same intellectually suffocating, soul-crushing feeling that I get when I try to explain something scientific to someone who has already made up their mind for other reasons unrelated to science."

                      "I won't waste reader's time here any more by respond to your torrent of 'what about's that simply confuse what is already widely known in science and academics."

                      Fuck Off anne.

                    • bo bo

                      Right or-well
                      And this extreme experience of trying to unlock K40 with PT attacking code then me like a piranha at every corner – made me bring that point u make just one step further. http://enenews.com/radiation-expert-horrific-health-toll-fukushima-nuclear-disaster-infant-death-significantly-increased-many-areas-japan-government-actions-unconscionable-impossible-be-moved-scale-deaths-human/comment-page-3#comment-701083

                      'is there and has there been an intention in the pronuclear community to make sure ( in forums such as enenews ) the anti nuclear movement gets stuck in a bound-to-fail logic of lumping all radiation across the board, as equally harmful ?'

                      I know, it's unfair to accuse others of being agents.
                      Well.. I kind of look at it as a point system.
                      Every time I endure several rounds of her accusing me of being an agent for this reason or that withOUT me accusing HER back of being one too, I view that as having fairly earned at least ONE round of accusing her back of being an agent, when a proper chance arrives.
                      I do think this is that proper moment.

                    • or-well

                      After 4 years it's time to speak.
                      Play anti but damage the site and the cause.
                      It's called a double agent.
                      Very old fashioned.
                      Folks are fooled by quantity. Far too many links of its have been stupid misinfo or simply non sequitur. Note also the effective use of this site's inadequate threading coupled with carpet-bombing to forestall targeted counter-response.
                      Very prolific posting for a sick old lady in so much pain she can hardly type.
                      Fuck it. She's not the only "agent" here.

                    • bo bo

                      High Five or-well

                    • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

                      I am anti Nuke. I am not a double agent. Have you read Dr. Goodheart. Are you calling him a double agent also?

                      “…Potassium 39, 40, etc, mimics the natural non radioactive mineral potassium, but it is a heavy metal, radioactive poison. …
                      “What are a few man made radioactive heavy metal poisons that mimic natural potassium? All of the following artificial man made elements mimic natural potassium and are absorbed by plants, animals and humans.

                      “ELEMENT/MINERAL – Amount of 'natural' radiation – Radiation Bq (bullets) fired/second

                      1 Gram Cesium 137 (C137) 0 3,200,000,000,000
                      1 Gram Rubidium 87 (87Rb) 0 49,000,000,000
                      1 Gram Potassium 40 (K40) 0 265,200
                      1 Gram Natural Potassium (K) with .0001117 K40 30
                      “The body contains 160 grams of potassium. Which of the above would you want to have in your body? All of the above radioactive elements mimic potassium and are absorbed by the body.

                      “Look at the difference between NO radioactive bullets being fired inside your body by the natural Potassium (K), and then the same amounts of man made radioactive elements Cesium, Rubidium, and radioactive Potassium 40. These three elements mimic the natural mineral potassium that is required for good health. …”


                    • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

                      or-well, when I mentioned that when social cohesiveness is more important than searching for the truth, another meltdown will occur.

                      You called me all sorts of names. Yet there are many countries in which a nuclear meltdown might occur including the US.

                      You accuse me of being black and white about the nuclear issue. Either you are pro Nuke or you are anti Nuke. How is there any way to be wishy washy on this issue? If you are wish washy you are by definition for the status quo and pro Nuke.

                      And yet it was bo who said she wanted everything out of the grey area.

                    • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

                      Please read this entire article by Dr. Goodheart and read all the citations. This article was started in July, 2014, over a year ago.

                    • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

                      And how can you say that I'm carpet bombing when bo kept asking me so many questions? Was I supposed to ignore her?

                    • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

                      I'm not a media agent. I have even posted my name and dissertation on Dante. I am not on Facebook or on any social media page. I don't post on any other forum.

                    • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

                      I have never said that all radiation is equally harmful. Yet the medical community itself says that any radiation can cause damage to a single cell, and a single cell can cause cancer. Do you discount all the doctors at Hasrvand Univ? Do you discount Dr. Helen Caldicott?

                      It is a straw argument to accuse me of saying that all radiation is equally harmful. A straw argument is when a person argues against something the person never said and has never advocated.

                      Are you for or against the theory of radiation hormesis? Please label this argument properly. I am arguing against any radiation hormesis along with the consensus of the entire scientific community and BEIR VII.

                      I am against raising the radiation allowed to be emitted by nuclear power plants. I am against starting up any new or old nuclear plants. I am in favor of shutting down all nuclear power plants immediately.

                    • HillbillyHoundDog HillbillyHoundDog


                    • HillbillyHoundDog HillbillyHoundDog

                      Bo, it must be really annoying to try to make a difference and not be seen…or heard…or validated…or acknowledged…either through wallpapering or just plain ignorance. Sorry for that. You have been very patient…and kind…and generous…
                      And I THINK YOU ARE DOING A GREAT JOB…

          • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

            Potassium-40 comes from Chlorine-37 by way of Helium-4 ions and nuclear fission. There is plenty of Helium-4 in the ocean. And don't forget that they poured sea water over the reactors at Fukushima to try to prevent meltdowns. A horrible failure.
            "The ratio of 3He/4H4 id 2.38 10^-6 in the atmosphere…which is assumed to be the equilibrium ratio of the He that enters the surface waters of the oceans…"
            p. 45 Chemical Oceanography, Millero, Frank J. 3rd ed. 22006.


        • Tim42

          <P><I>"Since then there have been added at least 1,000 Bq/m^3 of man-made Potassium-40 which is not part of natural potassium,"</I></P>

          <p>While overall salinity varies greatly in any particular body portion of seawater. Man-kinds Contribution of K-40 is negligible. Consider this, 0.93% of our atmosphere consists of Ar-40(99.6% of all Ar), care to guess where this came from, from the 4.4 billion years of radioactive decay of K-40, the earth had a lot more K-40 in the past. So much so, that Admiral Rickover stated that he thought that much radiation precluded the formation of complex life.
          http://atomicinsights.com/admiral-rickovers-final-testimony-to-congress/ </P>

          <p>Now here's some the nasty low down about Nuclear fission and Cs (134, 137), etc. These are formed in pure elemental form and doesn't have Eon's(time) to be lock up in some sort of complex mineral rock. These radioactive metals readily react with water and dissolve into solution.</P

          <p> While Cesium is a rough analog for Potassium, Cesium's outer electron shell is a bit larger and more loosely bonded than Potassium(lower activation energy). Thus it reacts explosively H20(water), while Sodium & Potassium metal will fiss a bit and then the h2 released will explode. </p>

          <p>Lower activation energy of these heavier elements promotes biological uptake and usage, I.E. Bio concentration had measured bio concentration factors in excess of >1000x.. red alga(Baltic sea after Chernobyl). </p>

          • Tim42

            "Since then there have been added at least 1,000 Bq/m^3 of man-made Potassium-40 which is not part of natural potassium,"

            While overall salinity varies greatly in any particular body portion of seawater. Man-kinds Contribution of K-40 is negligible. Consider this, 0.93% of our atmosphere consists of Ar-40(99.6% of all Ar), care to guess where this came from, from the 4.4 billion years of radioactive decay of K-40, the earth had a lot more K-40 in the past. So much so, that Admiral Rickover stated that he thought that much radiation precluded the formation of complex life.

            Now here's some the nasty low down about Nuclear fission and Cs (134, 137), etc. These are formed in pure elemental form and doesn't have Eon's(time) to be lock up in some sort of complex mineral rock. These radioactive metals readily react with water and dissolve into solution.

            While Cesium is a rough analog for Potassium, Cesium's outer electron shell is a bit larger and more loosely bonded than Potassium(lower activation energy). Thus it reacts explosively H20(water), while Sodium & Potassium metal will fiss a bit and then the h2 released will explode.

            Lower activation energy of these heavier elements promotes biological uptake and usage, I.E. Bio concentration had measured bio concentration factors in excess of >1000x.. red alga(Baltic sea after Chernobyl).

            • Angela_R

              Hi Tim, there was a report on quite high quantities of K-40, I think it was prepared for the European Parliament, but the general consensus by the nuclear industry was, "no worries, we eat it in bananas".

              However, it wasn't dismissed by those who undertook to prepare it.
              From memory it far outweighed any Cs. But you're right, there are some terrible nasties; its just that potassium 40 has been too readily overlooked.

        • still trying to find that link PT.. can you post it again?

          • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

            I will post it soon. I just got home from teaching elementary music all day.

          • Angela_R

            Dr. Goodheart you quote: "Radioactive Isotopes of Potassium come from radioactive aluminum and radioactive silicon"

            or, as I would understand, any nuclei of any atom or isotope which is present in a fissile process and that under the necessary conditions could supply 19 protons, for it is the 19 protons that decide the particular elemental isotope. There appear to be plenty of neutrons for formation of new nuclei, then one needs the necessary electrons…
            Lots of factors will influence what radioisotopes are produced. In fact how many different radioisotopes do they currently estimate are being found?

            btw Dr. Goodheart the link you are looking for was on a post by PT on Sept. 3 @ 2.35pm.

    • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar PraisingTruth

      1. Mass Animal Deaths June 2015: Sheep, Fish, Turtles, Chickens, Crabs, Dolphins, Sea Lions, Whales

      2. Sea turtle mass deaths
      November 17, 2013

      Since July 1, 2015 from:
      3. Semarnat reported 40 dead turtles in Veracruz coast
      20.07.2015 |

      4. 18th July 2015 – 60 dead turtles found during past 3 weeks in Venice, Italy. Link
      "Yellow" at sea, 60 turtles
      death in three weeks

      5. 13th July 2015 – Mass die off of turtles 'is a mystery' in Wellfleet Bay, Massachusetts, America. Link
      “..All told, 89 turtles were found in bad shape or dead; one juvenile, 64 mature and 12 unknown as to age. More inexplicably, 76 of the 89 turtles were females; only six were male and seven were too small to identify….”

      6. 1st July 2015 – 37 turtles found…

  • But in order to dispute the propaganda that even Iodine 131 is "natural" so measuring 49 Bq/kG of dewatered sludge "doesn't mean anything". Well that is just not true, it means a lot.

    Here is the calculation of how much natural Iodine 131 exists in its most dense natural environment

    1.91 E-9 Bq/M^3 !!!! Amazingly small! .00000000191 Bq/kG

    Compare that to 49 Bq/kG of Iodine 131 measured in Japan. That is

    25,711,281,588 Times larger than "Natural".


    I calculate the occurrence of "natural" I131,

    And show the Japan report for I131 in sewage at 49 Bq/m3

    good stuff.

  • invisible ELEphant in the room

    One amazing thing that enenews has proven to me…

    There are just a handful of people in the world who will seek out the real truth.

    We could post things that for all intents and purposes prove our case concerning Fukushima and its effects but proof won't be proof until it comes from the official channels.

    If it isn't reported by the mainstream media or possibly venerated academics/experts, it's not official. If it's not official, only a handful are listening.

    Is it because humanity is that dumb or is it brainwashing?

    I mean, people like us are a fraction of a fraction of 1% of the world's population. Literally one in a million.

    Why is that the case?

  • jackassrig

    Black bulb at Sendai Tg = 74.6 degF and rising. Rainy. The rain seems to help begin the temp down. I believe it may wash the nuclear out of the air.

  • melting mermaid melting mermaid

    Let's pump it all out and burn it. I'm sure there won't be any ramifications.

  • jackassrig

    On Aug 16, 2015, the black bulb temp Tg = 83.3 degF. Power was 186.6 watts / sq-meter. It looks like the event occurred sometime before the 16th as temp has been decreasing since. Rain may have been helpful.

  • rogerthat


    MIKE FAHER AUG. 30 2015

    … “It is our position that alternative sites should be identified and assessed or, alternatively, (Entergy) must guarantee that the spent fuel will be removed in a timely manner such that decommissioning will not be delayed and that the costs associated with doing so will not be taken from funding intended for decommissioning and/or site restoration,” Chris Campany, Windham Regional’s executive director, testified before the Vermont Public Service Board. …

  • melting mermaid melting mermaid

    Why? WHY WHY WHY? They forgot the biggest threat to mankind…the corporate occupied NRC.

  • rogerthat


    Osborne to visit Faslane in wake of whistleblower safety concerns
    david campbell / Sunday 30 August 2015

  • rogerthat


    Chromosomal aberrations in wild mice captured in areas differentially contaminated by the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant accident

    ABSTRACT Following the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant accident, radiation effects on non-human biota in the contaminated areas have been a great concern. The induction of chromosomal aberrations in splenic lymphocytes of small Japanese field mice (Apodemus argenteus) and house mice (Mus musculus) inhabiting Fukushima Prefecture was investigated.

    In mice inhabiting the slightly contaminated area, the average frequency of dicentric chromosomes was similar to that seen in mice inhabiting a non-contaminated control area.

    In contrast, mice inhabiting the moderately and heavily contaminated areas showed a significant increase in the average frequencies of dicentric chromosomes.

    Total absorbed dose rate was estimated to be approximately 1 mGy d-1 and 3 mGy d-1 in the moderately and heavily contaminated areas, respectively.

    Chromosomal aberrations tended to roughly increase with dose rate. …

  • jec jec

    Radiation measurements, http://www.netc.com, in Japan, near Fukushima, are really being 'managed.' When one looks at the Fukushaima/TEPCO measurements, the graph steps show an identical drop (perfectly the same) on the four year graph. PERFECTLY is not real with radiation. IF one looks at the publicly managed dosimeters/reports..they show a very different picture…Take a look. One has to be a member of NETC for the full data view..but even so..its showing management which is scary.

    • jec jec

      It not NETC management, as NETC indicates what is reported by devices on the ground in Japan to the internet. Wonder how long before the public in Japan will be 'controlled' and not allowed to post the private (and correct) dosimeter information??? Horrific death toll will sprial when looking at the private reporting..ongoing plumes…

  • Heart of the Rose Heart of the Rose

    Numbers can always be manipulated.
    It's one of the first rules of 'mafia' mentality.
    Toadies timidly obeying..
    Ohhh.. let timidity serve to keep the people from being alarmed AS THEY RIGHTLY SHOULD.

    News is ..perhaps a gang/mob war in Japan.
    Why? the pickings getting good?

  • melting mermaid melting mermaid

    Another explosion, this one in Spain. Another plane crashed in an airshow too. It's looking like Wigner and Jumpinjackflash might be on to something.

    • invisible ELEphant in the room

      MAYDAY: The Wigner Effect

      If the Wigner Effect is occurring in Europe due to Fukushima, things could be way further along in terms of destruction of the planet than any of us imagine.

      I've had a feeling for a while that our world could suddenly change overnight (due to the destruction of the planet from Fukushima). Not because the world actually changed overnight, just because the gradual changes were kept secret and then suddenly it's so obvious that everyone will know…


      Anyone else have a premonition like that?

  • Heart of the Rose Heart of the Rose

    Obama is going to rename Mt. McKinley.
    He's going there.
    Look more like a little 'look-see'.
    I mean if ..I were him, I would.
    See ..Alaska before the grave changes to it.

    "Perhaps, you ought to see this, Sir."

    "This might be a good time to believe in hormesis, Sir."

    "Enjoy, the invigorating air, Sir"

    Alaska-bound, Obama faces backlash on Mt. McKinley renaming
    Aug 31 2015


    • Down The River Down The River

      I saw that too, Heart. The place is dying and all the guy does is change the name of a mountain back to what the indigenous people called it.

      Here, have a crumb.

      Btw, Alaska has been on my bucket list for years, it just never made it to the top.

      • It's a "big move" play up to the Paris climate conference.

        Their goal is to roll out a NWO government not as a government per se, because there would be too much objection, revolt even.

        But through global accords on trade (you will damn well buy that radioactive fish Taiwan) and agreements on climate that are actual disguises for control of energy….a defacto NWO government is rolled out.

        • Down The River Down The River

          Probably so, Stock.

          Through global accords on trade, a defacto NWO government has been rolling out for years. And they will use the climate issue to further their agenda.

  • Down The River Down The River

    What killed Knut? Scientists say celebrity polar bear died of rare form of encephalitis


    Harald Pruess, a neurologist at Berlin's Charite hospital and a researcher at the German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases.

    “Knut’s case showed similarities to some of his human patients who suffered from anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis. The autoimmune disease, in which the body attacks its own brain cells, was only discovered in humans eight years ago and never previously found in animals.”
    That diagnosis has been confirmed.

    • Down The River Down The River

      I wonder how many more of the ’not-people’ we share this planet with, are dying/have died from this?

      • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

        When we all pollute this planet with unending synthetic/artificial garbage 24/7, like manmade radiation, we can expect more of this type or mutation in volume. Millions will die of strange things in the future..the Earth's petrie dish is very warm, and cooking up a new batch as we type. 🙁

        • Down The River Down The River

          Of course you are right obewan. The future is not looking bright for any of us.

          It’s just so sad bearing witness.

          • It on our watch, joust much?

            • Down The River Down The River

              Yes Stock, it is happening on our watch. I think about that all the time.

              Not many memories of success, in my decades of jousting.

                • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

                  stock, bust the k-40 obfuscation. Perhaps the single most important joust. This will defeat NOAA, Woods Hole, the IAEA model.

                  Imagine for a second if there was NO background radiation…wouldnt the nuclear cartel look a little naked spewing their deadly poisons around?

                  • Code, find some studies, or a study, that show k40 removed from an organism and that organism unhealthy after that.

                    conversely in 1900 about 6% did get cancer.

                    There is definitely cosmic radiation, and terrestrial radon and chains.

                    • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

                      stock, that 6% cancer in 1900 is not ALL from radiation, and perhaps none of it. There is evidence that smoke, cooked food and zoonotic disease is responsible for most of it, thus you are left with zero to say 1% cancer from the largest source of internal radiation which does not support the standard model of radiation danger. I will keep looking for more studies beyond the ones cited by MVB

                    • bo bo

                      Stock about the pre bomb cancer .. I thought the other day about XRays and how people would get lots of chest xrays with no concern for safety ?

                      I wonder how that affected the post Curie numbers compared to pre Curie..?

                    • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

                      re; pre industrial cancer. Also there was still cosmic radiation, polonium and radon. And as noted, zoonotic causes, carcinogens from cooked fat and other chemicals, free radicals from normal biological processes…so many causes. So that 6% pre nuclear era cancer CANT be pinned to k-40

                  • email me if anything, I can't follow thread, must work hard this week.

  • razzz razzz

    To say K-40 is inconsequential is an ignorant statement.

    "…The radioactive decay of 40K in the Earth's mantle ranks third, after 232Th and 238U, as the source of radiogenic heat.

    40K is the largest source of natural radioactivity in animals including humans. A 70 kg human body contains about 160 grams of potassium, hence about 0.000117 × 160 = 0.0187 grams of 40K; whose decay produces about 4,900 disintegrations per second (becquerels) continuously throughout the life of the body…"

    • Sam Sam

      please elaborate on what you consider the harmful effects of k-40 is on the human body.
      is it even possible to isolate it out to know the answer? again we have lived with an
      increasing amount of man made k-40 in last 70yrs along with ever increasing amounts
      of other man made radioactivity. it is a red herring to get more alarmed about k-40?

      I am alarmed about the 50 or so tons of aerosolized plutonium from Reactor 3 's nuclear
      explosion. see PattiB's commentsin Feb 4th, 2013 EEN article.Study: Fukushima plutonium in Pacific Ocean from ‘liquid direct releases’? Was the deposition of some of this plutonium on the surface of the Pacific Ocean now part of the tipping point? Stock comments about first 200' irradiated. Does not plutonium deposition heat up the water and affect all the live in that zone?

  • In researching Ocean radiation I came across this nugget. For those who say dilution is the solution, flip them the bird.

    It takes 1000 to 2000 years for the oceans to mix to full depth. See below.

    We also know from real testing that 95% of the radiation stay in the top 200 feet, for enough time to do real damage to the biosphere. stock out

    The composition of natural uranium consists of the two long-lived isotopes, 238U and 235U, with respective half-lives of 0.7 and 4.5 billion years [Jaffey et al., 1971], and the 234U granddaughter of 238U, with a half-life of ∼245 thousand years (kyr) [Cheng et al., 2000b]. In most natural waters, U occurs in the highly soluble U6+ oxidation state, and in the oceanic environment the assumed residence time of U is several hundred thousand years, substantially longer than the global ocean mixing time, determined as 1–2 thousand years by 14C reservoir ages [Chen et al., 1986; Ku et al., 1977]. Thus, the open oceans are assumed to have a homogeneous salinity-normalized U concentration (∼3.3 ng/g) which has been shown to be correct at least to a first order [Chen et al., 1986; Ku et al., 1977]. Furthermore, the 234U/238U activity ratio of the open oceans, calculated from the atomic ratio and the 234U and 238U half-lives, is presently enriched in 234U by ∼15% with respect to radioactive secular equilibrium [Ku et al., 1977]. It

  • Things make sense when you view them from reality, no matter how harsh that reality is.

    . It is simple enough. Any one paying attention can fill in the other pieces, like India prevented from doing their own aggressive solar buildout by the ruling of a world trade organization…..that nails trade and energy in one shot.

    The power play of the New World Order.

    Amazingly, but there is a reason for it, this "president" is renaming Mount McKinley named after a former president.
    Their goal is to roll out a NWO government not as a government per se, because there would be too much objection, revolt even.

    The play is like this. "If we can accomplish changing the largest mountain what else can't we accomplish as we work as one big worldwide team".

    But through global accords on trade (you will damn well buy that radioactive fish Taiwan) and agreements on climate that are actual disguises for control of energy….a defacto NWO government is rolled out.

    Obama departs on Monday morning for a three-day tour of the nation's largest state, closely choreographed to call attention to the ways Obama says climate change is already damaging Alaska's stunning scenery. By showcasing thawing permafrost, melting sea ice and eroding shorelines, Obama hopes to raise the sense of urgency to deal quickly to slow climate change in the U.S. and…

  • Sea King Truth Sea King Truth

    In case you missed it: http://www.veteranstruthnetwork.com/index.php/component/k2/item/386-fukushima-the-end-of-mankind

    Fukushima: The End of Mankind?

    By Dennis Cimino

    In the aftermath of the nuclear disaster at the Fukushima Daichi Nuclear Power Plant in Japan, it’s hard to fathom or describe the environmental damage to the Earth, because it eclipses all prior nuclear accidents by such a huge margin. In the four years now since the earthquake caused the breakage of critical reactor cooling apparatus and plumbing to the point where the plants were not able to sustain or maintain the nearly one million gallons per reactor per minute, needed to cool them, the continued exposure to the entire world has continued unabated, unchecked. Adequate cooling flow to prevent what is truly a "China Syndrome" (see the film starring Jane Fonda), was not possible even had the cooling system at Daichi survived the earthquake event. (continue with link)

  • Let's take this over 1,000 comments

  • Yea… party time.. over 1,000 comments

  • Oopps, maybe their coverup got blown?

    August 29 2015 Partial Meltdown At Restarted Sendai Mox Fuel Powered Nuclear Plant?

    Updated with evidence of elevated radiation readings in the local area..

  • They cannot keep this secret forever… if it indeed happened.

  • aunavoz

    Hi Code .. I am not sure I am linked to right comment. You feel "closer to death" .. don't go there please.

    Another story ..

    I knew Jim Belushi for awhile .. friend of a friend .. I knew him before and when John died .. even without any drugs etc .. you could feel that creative hot burning energy in the family ..

    John never could turn it off ..

    Jim learned.

    • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

      aunavoz, thanks for that interesting comment about Belushi. Actually, mine was an oblique joke…too oblique to be understood for sure…but I was insinuating that the time that I spent hammering away on these issues was sort of time wasted (for the very little good it would do). Each day brings us closer to our end whether we live to be 50 or 150, each day is still a limited precious thing. SO I was actually admonishing myself for hanging around ENEnews instead of dancing the tango, or skydiving or seeing friends.

    • HillbillyHoundDog HillbillyHoundDog

      Always personal with auna…never any sustenance.

      Typical of the "not pro nuke just hate ene" crowd.

  • Marcie

    … the human toll from Fukushima is horrendous: 2,000 Japanese people have died from the evacuations and another 5,000 are expected to die from future cancers…

    What are they smoking? This damn thing is killing everything in it's wake one dead/damaged cell at a time. Something that can kill basically everything in a huge ocean like the Pacific is probably going to kill more than 5,000 people. I can't imagine where they got that number.

  • Potassium 40 (combined decay) 1.250 billion years (1,250,000,000)
    So if the current level in the ocean is 12,000 Bq/M3 then 1.25B y ago it was 24000, and 2.5B y ago it was 48000 and 3.75 B y ago it was 96,000 Bq/M3

    There are 1000 L in a M3, so that is 96 Bq/L.
    1 kG per L

    96 Bq/kG. Double as high as the sewage in Japan in August and July 2015. So not as “hot as used fuel”

    Current in ocean is 12 Bq/kG, for perspective.

    K40 is not that harmful to living plants and animals. Not compared to stuff that concentrates in organ or bones and blasts the same area repeatedly.

    got it now?

    • How much K40 was created by all atomic bombs, nuclear plants and nuclear accidents, total?

      • Tim42

        "How much K40 was created by all atomic bombs, nuclear plants and nuclear accidents, total?"

        Negligible, K-40 is formed during the Carbon-Oxygen fusion stage (300 years) of a large mass star just before going supernova.

        Earth's atmosphere contains ~73,000,000,000,000 tons of Argon-40, a decay product of K-40(~same weight). So you can imagine there was a large amount of K-40.

        Potassium makes up 2.1% of the earth's crust, which top 30K weighs in ~1×10^23Kg of that 2.1% is K or 2.1×10^21Kg of that K 0.012% is radioactive K-40 or 2.52*10^17Kg(2.52*10^14 tonns) in the outer 30km of Earth's crust.

        At most Humanity has fission-ed(split apart) a couple million tonns of Uranium. But make no mistake, Cs-137 is ~80,000,000 times more radioactive than K-40. Cs-134 tack on another 7x to that. Add in a bit of bio-concentration and you've got a deadly combination.

        • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

          Tim42, thanks for your informative post. You give an indication of the small amount of man made K-40. I have it that the

          yield of k-40 as a fission product of uranium-235 is less than .0003%. Compare to cesium which has a yield C-137= 6.1%

          We can end the debate then about the natural quantity of k-40 and the amount of radiation we are bathed in without harm. More or less 5000 bq or 400 million radioactive decays every day.

          When you say cesium137 is 80 million times more radioactive than k-40, it STILL leaves open the Woods Hole comparison, because the specific activity is not considered, only the becquerels, so they truthfully compare 8 bq C137 to 12,000 bq background. They key is describing WHY K-40 demonstrates no danger, and why fallout demonstrates a higher danger than assumed. Bioaccumulation is not enough.

          But certainly a part of it is given by the specific activity as you touch upon. Another way to look at it;
          takes 1,400,000,000 atoms of C137 to give one becquerel
          it takes 57,000,000,000,000,000 atoms of K-40 to give one becquerel. The significance needs explanation though

    • How much was in the oceans 13.772 billion years ago?

      In 2012, WMAP estimated the age of the universe to be 13.772 billion years, with an uncertainty of 59 million years. In 2013, Planck measured the age of the universe at 13.82 billion years.Dec 20, 2013
      How Old is the Universe? – Space.com

      Good work Stock!

      Now all of that should match up with sediment records, correct?

      Is anyone measuring K40 in the ocean sediment, say 40 feet or so down, outside of the atomic age influence?

    • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

      stock, is bioconcentration sufficient to explain away the demonstrated lack of danger from 400 million decays internally from k-40 each day (5000bq)? I would think to question the validity of the linear dose, no threshold model.

      One point that stands out is that even if mouse A has 100 bq and mouse B also has 100 bq, if the radiation in mouse B is from a high specific activity isotope the radiation intensity near each radioactive particle or atom will much higher, even millions of times higher. Thus microscopically local radioactivity from C137 is 40 millions of times greater, than k-40 even though the body average is the same. I believe the ICRP debates this effect.

  • zaner8 zaner8

    I Love you all over,

    like in every inch of your existence.

    May our offspring give us guidance.

  • haizedustrium-1234 haizedustrium-1234

    When it comes to olympics the measurements are very accurate and precise. (All for fun and games)
    When it comes to life threatening activities killing thousands, the paper owners hide the facts in the cupboards. (Who knows how many)

    • Yes, down to nano seconds and nano meters.. Exactamundo…

      When it comes to nuclear accidents, ahhhh, who cares? Let's not measure.. Let's just ESTIMATE! Say 10% of Chernobyl perhaps? Oh, and no one ever dies, ok? That sounds good, right? (sarc)

      Now let's go watch some sports and do about fun stuff, like dancing.

      • haizedustrium-1234 haizedustrium-1234

        amicus numeros exata esatto 正確です 정확한

        (This motorcycle produces between 10 and 300 horsepower, but can deliver up to 500 horsepower or more.
        We have't tested it but it is believed to peak at higher than that. We will test it on the public roads soon.)

  • code, you got link for this?

    the small amount of man made K-40. I have it that the

    yield of k-40 as a fission product of uranium-235 is less than .0003%. Compare to cesium which has a yield C-137= 6.1%

You must be logged in to post a comment.