LET'S MAKE THIS EASY FOR ALL OF US - PLEASE EXPLAIN BIOACCUMULATION
All of you have at BRAWN have been giving us the data we been in search of, even if it's just in central Cal and for that we are very thankful. Here's the problem, few of us understand how it relates to accumulated intake. Please explain to all of us how bioaccumulation works as well defining how picocuries translates into millirem/rem on yearly level.
I am not a rocket scientist, at least not yet, but I almost suggest that we start stocking up on foods now, even with the current level of radiation in our milk and veggies because Cesium and Strontium levels will only accumulate. PLEASE EXPLAIN THE CONVERSION TABLE!
It is not simple. Each
It is not simple. Each isotope emits different amounts and types of radiation when a SINGLE nucleus decays. When calculating dose you need to know the method of exposure (external, ingestion, inhallation, injection (medical procedures).
Then you need to know the length of exposure. Ingestion usually means most of the istope will pass through within a few days. Inhallation, depending on the isotope usually means you have it until you die or the isotope fully decays.
Then you need to know the SPECIFIC isotope and HOW MUCH you were exposed to. You then look up in the dose conversion tables, here on this site, for the dose conversion factor. This conversion factor than either increases or decreases your total dose.
Isotopes such as S-90, Cs-137, etc. all emit different amounts of alpha, beta and gamma radiation. They also bind to different areas in the body. S-90 looks like calcium to the body so the body deposits it in the bones. This means that more of the body will be exposed over time. This means that a higher dose conversion factor is used (you will receive MORE radiation over time)
Unless you are a nuclear worker and you are exposed to a know amount of radiation it is very hard to work out a proper dose that you MAY be exposed to.
In general scientists will look at what isotopes are generally in the environment, for what length of time and then they can try and calculate dose.
The hard part is when you need to figure out expose in food stuffs. Different people consume different amounts of food and so they have diffent exposures. Some populations are at increased risk (Infants, People with comprimised immune systems, etc.).
I-131 mainly is taken up by the thyroid and concentrated there. Since it has such a short half life you need a larger amount of exposure to have an increased risk. S-90 and Cs-137, however very long half lives relative to our normal human lifespan. This means even very small exposures can have long lasting risks.
I am sorry there is not a simple way to figure out dose. I think you need to look at what the current levels are in the food you commonly eat and decide if you think the levels are safe compared to what the EPA, FDA, etc. think is safe.
Right now the levels in milk are rising even as those in air and rainwater are falling. This to me could mean a few things.
1. The radioactive isotopes that the cows were exposed to have been inhaled or ingested and have not cleared their systems yet. This time to clean the living organism is called biological half-life.
2. The cows are still being exposed and their are bioaccumulating these isotopes.
3. Milk in UC Berkley testing is currenlty 10 times about "safe" levels established by EPA and indications are that the levels are still going up.
Bioaccumulation
Thank you for that explanation.
You might find this
You might find this interesting:
https://marshallislands.llnl.gov/plutonium.php
as with the cows, humans living in the Marshall islands where many nuclear detonations occured from 1945 to 1958 are an isolated almost controlled scientific study of bioaccumulation over a lifespan of Plutonium!
Everything about radioactive exposure both external and internal in relation to individual effects is truly variable and yet, people in the Marshall Islands for the most part live with it in higher amounts than the rest of the world!
The fact that everything including everyone the world over DOES have traces of Plutonium in their bodies simply because we are all 'Post 1945 Atomospheric Nuclear Testing inhabitants' not to mention all other nuclear related events appears to show that while the increase of certain diseases are likely the result of Plutonium and all other fission products produced by man in the environment, the fact remains that Fukushima adds to the burden of exposure and will continue to add to it up until the end of the supposed 10 year period for the plant to be completely decommissioned and cleaned up.
-Off my menu: All seafood. I'm culinarily frustrated and will miss all kinds such as Anchovies on Pizza, Red Snapper, Crab, Flounder, Salmon, Fake crab (made with Pollock, an ocean fish), Abalone, Squid (used to make Calamari), Sea Bass, Shrimp, Seaweeds, Tuna etc...
EPA Limits VS. FDA Derived
EPA Limits VS. FDA Derived Intervention Level: The EPA limit for I-131 in milk, as with basically all EPA limits, is based on a continuous exposure to the contaminant for 70 years. If your milk was always above the limit that would be bad and something would need to be done. The FDA Derived Intervention Level is for a specific product on a specific day. It doesn't take into account long term intake of a contaminant. If on Tuesday, you drink milk greater than the FDA limit, that is bad. Somewhere between these two "limits", a judgement call must be made. For example: drinking milk 10 times the EPA limit for a month, is that bad? The EPA limit for milk is 3 picoCuries per liter of radioactive istotopes like iodine-131 and cesium-137 (= 81 Becquerels/liter) and the FDA "limit" is 4,700 picoCuries of iodine-131 in a liter of milk and up to 33,000 picoCuries of cesium-137 (1 Becquerrel = 27 Picocurie).
well, if we're finding
well, if we're finding cesium in milk in hawaii at levels of around 19 pCi/L, that means it's gonna be above the EPA limits for more than 70 years because it's in the cows, and the soil, and the grass, and it has a 30 year half-life. So essentially, if you live in Hawaii, you should either drink imported milk, or expect to get lumpies, right?
Cesium-137 has a radioactive
Cesium-137 has a radioactive half life of ~30 years. If you put some in a box, in 30 years it will only be half as radioactive. If you or a cow eat an apple, it has a Biological half life. Maybe 16 hours. That is the amount of time it takes your body to excrete half the apple. When radioactive material is taken into the body, it "goes away" by both the radioactive halflife and the biological halflife for that specific radioisotope. The human biological half life for CS-137 is about 70 days. I think it is probably about the same for a cow. Right now the cow is eating grass covered with minute traces of CS-137. After a couple of rains, that will dissappear into the soils, rivers and oceans. Some of the stuff in the soil and river will get taken back up (again) into plants animals and people. Each iteration it will be decreased. Keep in mind the FDA limit is 33,000 picoCuries of cesium-137 per liter.
umm, 33,000 PcI per liter is the LIMIT? Gotta source for that?
a link?
My understanding is that cesium gets absorbed into the organs and stays there doing damage for however long it is in the body.
But does the FDA say it is okay for this to get into our ovaries, testes, liver, lungs, intestines, heart, thyroids, etc etc etc. (not to mention breast milk, fetuses, babies, uteruses, and colons)
WHERE did you get that as the FDA limit? I mean, if they say that's okay, then, well then, who am I to say they are wrong?
But frankly if NO dose is too low to be potentially harmful this sounds like a HUGE amount to me.
This web page is an FDA FAQ.
This web page is an FDA FAQ. http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucm247403.htm if you go to the third question down, there is a pdf link for a table of limits, excuse me Derived Intervention Levels. Many sites talk about the difference between the FDA and EPA requirements. some are more balanced than others http://m.current.com/technology/93153751_why-does-fda-tolerate-more-radi... is an example that talks about Hilo milk in particular. No dose is absoluteley safe. No lead in paint or gas or batteries is absoluteley safe. All toxins and contaminants have some level of risk, whether man caused or just natural. When they talk about increased risk of getting a cancer, keep in mind, the risk for anyone getting cancer anywhere is something like 33% for women and 44% for men. That has nothing to do with radiation exposure, just the way it is.
These are financially safe levels
I think Americans are becoming very educated on a broken system that ultimately shields corporate America. But it's even scarier to think they can do so in such an easy manner. If allowable levels of CS-137 are really that high, it's suggest one thing. They obviously don't care about human life. I'm baffled that so many here still agree with the notion that these levels are something to look beyond. Unfortunately every one of us will deal with the after affects of Fukushima, whether it be a friend or family member dying. But as most things go, it's just one more life, without any solid proof or reasoning for death. America truly is a sick place to live where financial gain is more valuable than human life.
I totally agree....
I totally agree....
Not Sold
You lost my vote when you said, "When they talk about increased risk of getting a cancer, keep in mind, the risk for anyone getting cancer anywhere is something like 33% for women and 44% for men. That has nothing to do with radiation exposure, just the way it is."
Saying that when you "talk about increased risk of getting a cancer" together with "has 'nothing' to do with radiation exposure" is just plain stupid. Not buying it, sorry.
Sell your stocks now, be smart.
Cancer probability
according to the American Cancer Society here http://www.cancer.org/Research/CancerFactsFigures/CancerFactsFigures/pro... chance of getting invasive cancer between birth and death for men is 44% and women 38%, in the US general population. I have no doubt a few cancers are "caused" by weapons testing fallout, Chernoybal, Three Mile Island, medical radiation exposure and coal, and now maybe a few more due to Fukushima. These percentages are not deaths from cancer, just incidence of cancer. Just a little perspective I think.
Anyone?
Anyone?
Even if this toxic waste was
Even if this toxic waste was not radioactive, I would not want to eat or drink any of it. Before the 40's there was 0% of this garbage in the air. Thank the nuclear industry. Something sealed 70 years ago is safe.