URANIUM DETECTED BY EPA IN CALIFORNIA

Can someone please clarify for me: it is said Uranium 238 is natural. however, why does it not show up on other states that are not part of the westcoast?
Is this U238 now from the Japanese reactors or another source?
If it was from previous nuclear testing it would show up in other states too, right?

...Let's quit this "I'm right!" "No, I'M RIGHT!" nonsense and let the BRAWM staff look into this and Reply to this concern as they see fit.

I'm as much of a conspiracy nut as anyone at this point, but let's look at this report carefully. IF the EPA or federal Government or whomever was truly trying to "cover this up", they WOULD NOT release this information, PERIOD -- not even, as in this case, two to three weeks after-the-fact. This would be close-hold. There are only a few explanations, here:

[1] It is believed, and correctly, by ACTUAL SCIENTISTS employed or connected with the Government that these levels ARE highly unusual as well as dangerous / hazardous / toxic, and the Government, realizing that, is for some reason content to release this information willy-nilly -- with zero fanfare, explanation, or context, and "late" too, inflaming the curiosity and fears of people like us, risking that it will at some point "out" into the general public through our awareness-raising efforts, and chancing an historic, society-shaking mass panic;

[2] It is believed, and correctly, by ACTUAL SCIENTISTS employed or connected with the Government that these levels ARE highly unusual as well as dangerous / hazardous / toxic, and the Government IS trying to keep this information "secret" -- but is simply so incompetent as to allow some low-level staffer or paper-shuffling bureaucrat to post this hugely worrying information, in the dead of night, and then KEEP IT UP there, for DAYS, for ANYONE to see -- and on the EPA's own home page, no less. Again, not only running the risk of that national panic I described above, but simultaneously annihilating any of their nefarious plans to keep the public ignorant for as long as possible, while moving things into place for the eventual realization that we're all screwed once people start getting sick (and if THAT were the case, I suspect this budget sideshow would have been quickly and quietly resolved LONG before last night's impasse -- remember, even Nancy Pelosi has to go home to San Francisco, to her southern California vineyards, and to her grandchildren)...

[3] It is believed, INCORRECTLY, by ACTUAL SCIENTISTS employed or connected with the Government that these levels ARE either well within the normally observable ranges of data, and therefore nothing to get into a high sweat over... OR, ARE unusual, but are so diffuse and minimal as to present almost zero identifiable impact on the human population at this point. In which case, the Government is acting more or less in good faith, presenting what information they have via the EPA for anyone to see; however, they're being really, REALLY obtuse, in assuming that, without specific explanation or data to defend these observations, the general public will simply accept these results and NOT panic... In other words, they see no reason to provide any information, even reassuring information, at all. But, again -- this is INCORRECT, let's say -- in which case, we're really really screwed, because the best scientific minds our society can produce are WRONG... So, we can't trust ANYTHING even learned and experienced people say. Therefore, we might as well throw everything -- and I mean everything -- the good folks at BRAWM are telling us, too, because there's no way for a layperson to know the difference between a scientists who knows what they're talking about, and one who doesn't. With no one to present us with reliable information, we're all on our own, and you should be sticking your finger in the wind and setting your own and your family's course by that and that alone, 'cause no one can be trusted to not be a self-destructive fool.

[4] It is believed, CORRECTLY, by ACTUAL SCIENTISTS employed or connected with the Government that these levels ARE either well within the normally observable ranges of data, and therefore nothing to get into a high sweat over... OR, ARE unusual, but are so diffuse and minimal as to present almost zero identifiable impact on the human population at this point. In which case, just as with Option [3] above, yes, the Government is acting more or less in good faith, presenting what information they have via the EPA for anyone to see; however, they're being really, REALLY obtuse, in assuming that, without specific explanation or data to defend these observations, the general public will simply accept these results and NOT panic... In other words, they see no reason to provide any information, even reassuring information, at all. But, again -- THEY'RE RIGHT, at least as far as they know, for the moment, and because I don't think any of us here, excepting he BRAWM folks, are ACTUAL nuclear scientists or physicians specializing in radiation exposure and medicine, we might as well trust them, seeing as they're obviously confident enough in their conclusions to post them on their own Web site with ZERO supporting argumentation, explication, or quantification.

There's an Option [5], of course: NO ONE KNOWS WHAT THE HELL THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT, and NO ONE KNOWS WHAT THE HELL THEY'RE DOING. In which case, I refer to the solution I outlined in [3]: We're all on our own, and you should be sticking your finger in the wind and setting your own and your family's course by that and that alone, 'cause no one can be trusted to not be a self-destructive fool, a schemer, or a madman.

Again -- I want to hear what the BRAWM folks have to say; they LIVE in California, and so do their families. They start to become concerned, I will, too. (Again -- this is what makes them so VERY special and unique during this ongoing emergency.)

Anyway, it's entirely possible that Option [5] really IS "the right one" -- how much data really exists on this stuff, how reliable is it, and how probable is it, truly, that ANY viable predictions can be made about ANY of this, to ANY degree? This sort of thing must really piss off the scientifically disciplined mind -- to be able to provide data, sure, but to be at the end of the day unsure how said data informs the "real-world" decisions we are, all of us, considering and contemplating, now. So you can measure the decay of a certain isotope in a single batch of air taken from one monitoring station at a fixed location on one day in the course of an ongoing event that may well take years, or longer, to conclude. How do you take that information, hard-won and verifiable though it is, and translate that into whether or not you should ask that McDonald's leave the lettuce off your next quarter pounder with cheese? I do not envy you, BRAWM staff; maybe not knowing is better than having the ability to find, assemble, organize, and report the data, but not to know all the myriad permutations and circumstances by which that data influences your life. We are all, after all, living lives WELL "inside the test tube" now... And I suspect we will continue to, for the rest of our lives. Things just don't go back the way they were, ever again. (If you think I'm wrong, please, correct me, and tell me why.)

BRAWM staff, I don't know if you've realized it, yet, but you are a microcosm of what your Government SHOULD be, as well as of what responsible, well-informed, public-interest-valuing professionals in EVERY profession should be like. Without you, there would be a vast, frightening, deafening silence out there... Being a lifelong Republican, and a person who only ever visited California under protest, and a father who previously would have cringed at the thought of my child asking to attend BERKELEY, of all places, I just have to say: I am learning a LOT, about a lot of things, these days, and finding some of my most fundamental, treasured, and formerly "bulletproof" assumptions, biases and conclusions no longer hold water.

I am eager to read what you have to say.

Rick Cromack
Allen, Texas
RichardFCromackJr@gmail.com
972-746-8575