Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is Fukushima Radiation Contaminating Tuna, Salmon and Herring On the West Coast of North America?
Zero Hege ^ | 26 August, 2013 | George Washington

Posted on 08/26/2013 7:34:30 PM PDT by Errant

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-104 last
To: Wonder Warthog

If you are going to understand health effects, you MUST compare radon, Cs-137 or Sr, as well as background radiation.
__________________________________________________________

No. I do not have to compare radon to the recklessness in the nuclear power industry that has dumped 300+ tons of radioactive waste into the oceans since March of 2011, and has poured massive amounts of radioactive waste into the air - and will continue to add more pollution to the air and water every day for an indefinite period of time - at present - until all the fuel waste has been dispersed across the US. If we are fortunate...no...VERY LUCKY...the tons of intact fuel sitting in crumbling spent fuel pools will be stored rather than vented into the air and water in the event that the damaged structure collapses due to earth quake, tsunami, liquification of the land as it has begun to subside under the buildings due to water issues, or gravity - even moving those rods to store them is iffy. Or the site may become too radioactive for humans to maintain. No - I am satisfied that background radiation is addressed - there are radon detectors and rules to minimize the risk and no one is denying it’s harmful just like no one denies sunlight can cause skin cancer and we should use SPF. But RADON is less harmful than the contaminants coming out of Fukushima and Fukushima was avoidable. That’s the tragedy - generations to come will experience the effects of all that waste coming out of Fukushima and it was avoidable.


101 posted on 09/03/2013 10:27:31 AM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog

Nuclear power apologists ignore medical studies dating back to the 50’s proving the risks behind exposure, proving that exposure causes cancer, leukemia and other diseases. They ignore respected studies like the BEIR VII. They ignore that sad petri dish known as the Ukraine, where people born today are exposed to the same radiation that people were exposed to 25 years ago when Chernobyl blew up, and they raise their families in contaminated zones (only high level radiation zones were evacuated, others are forced to live their lives in contaminated zones because there’s no where else for them to live) and deal with debilitating illnesses. Nuke pimps act like all this evidence is non existant and come to this thread and have the audacity to ask, “Where’s the proof?” So hey, if Chernobyl didn’t flick a light on somewhere that maybe it’s harmful for people to be exposed to radioactive waste - what could possibly convince someone, eh? But hormesis? THAT is science nuke pimps can’t WAIT to get behind.
Why aren’t nuke apologists embarrassed to deny living proof (Ukraine) and decades of reputable peer reviewed large scale studies in favor of hormesis? How does one get the gall to portray themselves as scientifically objective and those who cite studies like BEIR VII as uneducated “hysterics”. How can you possibly claim the scientific high ground?


102 posted on 09/03/2013 10:39:44 AM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

LOL. Gotcha covered, bud. You’re a ranting maniac antinuker.

It sounds to me like you get your information at sites like this:

http://allreactorsleakallthetime.com/category/fukushima-2/

I suspect that BIER VII is to radiation science as ICCC18 (or whatever the number of the upcoming document is) is to “climate change”.

Rant, rant, rant......it’s what you do. But ask you to provide even a single actual piece of real data, and you dodge, dodge, dodge.

Oh, and the professor who taught my health physics courses thought Gofman was a ranting nutcase.

You refuse to enlighten us with your credentials. You refuse to point to even a single piece of science (all I asked for originally was what was the AMOUNT of radioactivity in those 13 (or 15, or whatever) fish samples).

Not gonna waste any more time with you......I’ve got real world work to do.


103 posted on 09/03/2013 3:06:15 PM PDT by Wonder Warthog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog

Wow! You are very defensive about that hormesis stance aren’t you?

The BEIR VII is state of the art medical research, but if it says something you don’t like, ridicule it as pop science while you defend...hormesis.

Yeah the pro nuke pimps can’t actually disprove Gofman’s work but they REALLY insist he’s insane. No science behind their rants. So medical research = maniac but your hormesis theory is...what?

Yeah I got your number too, not wasting more time on ya.


104 posted on 09/03/2013 10:45:27 PM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-104 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson