Detecting radiation mildly in excess of the national standards. There is no indication the radiation is "excessive" in terms of risk or danger, or that the number set by the government might be too low, or too high for that matter.
You used the lower of two numbers -- I quoted from the article. The article used some average number. It wasn't either the high or the low readings taken by the reporter. The article provided no indication that radiation has been measured in the milk the children are drinking -- other articles have indicated that milk and other items ARE being tested, and that milk consumption was stopped when unnatural readings were found, so it is simple speculation that there is a risk in consumption.
If I lived in Japan, I'd spend some money on test equipment, and do enough of my own testing to make myself reasonably sure the risks were acceptable.
detecting excessive radiation in tea leaves
Detecting radiation mildly in excess of the national standards. There is no indication the radiation is “excessive” in terms of risk or danger, or that the number set by the government might be too low, or too high for that matter.
*****************************
Then let’s use ‘detecting radiation mildly in excess of the national standards’ 300km from where the children are - this likely means that the levels of radioactive contamination are higher near the plant where the children live. But how high? They are finding hot spots in Tokyo and are now going to test 100 locations in that city. And thats about 140km from the children. Symptoms similar to those found in ARS in children living near Fukushima should be examined and not brushed off as seasonal allergies. A white blood count test should have been a slam dunk and if the Japanese pediatrician isn’t interested in doing it then I am grateful to the mobile clinic that will.