Milk/0.70 Becquerels per liter

It is something that the reports re: iodine in milk is troubling but IF there is radioiodine isn't there ALSO the likelihood of other nuclear byproducts such as stronium 90, radio-cesium etc in the milk and given that aren't the risks compunded by the multiple insults to the body not only in the thyroid but throughout the body's organs, liver, ovaries, prostates breasts etc isd these substances are ALSO in the milk.

Realy, just asking.

People focus on the iodine as it is the most immediate and well known threat but it seems if we are saturating our bodies with multiple radionuclides, all toxic over time, then we need to be aware that simply saying "whoah! lotta radioiodine but not to worry as it is not the same as the annual dose which is what the EPA uses to set standards." But IF there are multiple radionuclides may we not be getting superdosed internally when you add them all up and thuis all the reassurances of safety are bogus or dissingenuous at least?

Can the Berkeley folks comment on the milk TOTALS for all radionuclides vis a vis internal doses?

I think the recent interview with a Japanese nuclear expert Hirose Takashi would be helpful in understanding the health risks of radiation. Here's a quote of what he said about radiation levels detected in the air and the health risk:

"The reason radioactivity can be measured is that radioactive material is escaping. What is dangerous is when that material enters your body and irradiates it from inside.

They say as you move away the radiation is reduced in inverse ratio to the square of the distance. I want to say the reverse. Internal irradiation happens when radioactive material is ingested into the body. What happens? Say there is a nuclear particle one meter away from you. You breathe it in, it sticks inside your body; the distance between you and it is now at the micron level. One meter is 1000 millimeters, one micron is one thousandth of a millimeter. That’s a thousand times a thousand squared. That’s the real meaning of “inverse ratio of the square of the distance.” Radiation exposure is increased by a factor of a trillion. Inhaling even the tiniest particle, that’s the danger."

It seems the bottom line is that what ends up in your body, internally, will determine health risk, and not as much as how much radiation exposure received from the air. Therefore, you cannot accurately assess the health risks of radiation by comparing radiation exposure to simple background radiation. This is the fact that the mainline "experts" are ignoring, and explains why no level of radiation is safe when inhaled or ingested. Personally, I would refrain from drinking any milk, water or other products with any radiation contamination.

You can view and read the transcript of the complete interview of Hirose Takashi here: http://www.counterpunch.org/takashi03222011.html.

Nancy

Would it be possible to identify the expiration date and/or the date bottled (if known) for reference in the milk test results? This information might be of more use to consumers than the purchase date alone.

My family can't thank your team enough for the genuine information and data you've provided over the past several weeks. Please keep up the great work.