Cesium AND Iodine in Hilo, HI

Submitted by Anonymous on Thu, 2011-04-14 08:29

There has only been ONE posting to RadNet for milk findings, since 4/10. They posted Reno, NV yesterday, and no traces of radiation. Has it even rained there?

But, on 4/10, they posted that Hilo, HI had Cesium and Iodine. I think 3 pCi/L is the max for Iodine radiation, not radiation in general, right? Is there an action level for Cesium, too?

http://www.epa.gov/radiation/rert/radnet-sampling-data.html#milk

I-131 came in at 18 pCi/L (6x the max for drinking water)
Cs-137 came in at 19 pCi/L
Cs-134 came in at 24 pCi/L

Should we be more concerned about the Cesium, given the longer half-life, or can our bodies take more of that, than the Iodine?

‹ [R. Cromack] New Scientist Article from March 15 Fukushima Uni. to check high-altitude radiation ›

The levels for Cesium (all

Submitted by moon1234 (not verified) on Thu, 2011-04-14 14:13.

The levels for Cesium (all Isotopes) should be much lower than I-131. Cesium has a much longer half life. Essentially it will be with you until the end of your life. NO Cesium is "safe", but it is best to keep isotopes with long half lives (Cs-137, Strontium-90, etc.) out of your body.

U mean decays not level

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 2011-04-14 19:26.

You can have same concentration level of cesium versus iodine but it is just that cesium will be with you longer
This also means cesium has a better chance to accumulate to a higher level than iodine.