Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 2011-04-20 09:02.
I have seen nowhere the Gov, EPA or FDA are saying fish greater than (the DIL) 170 Bq/Kg are safe or acceptable. They are testing imported fish. What they are saying about caught (US) fish, is that thaey can't have gotten from japan to the west coast yet. They just don't swim that fast. So if you see or can cite a specific instance of west coast US fish exceeding the limit of 170 Bq/Kg, I would be most interested.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 2011-04-21 06:34.
So has any organization found a fish with >170 Bq/kg in US waters or US catches? The FDA is monitoring Imported fish (you know, they come on planes and ships) that move fast from Japonese contaminated coastal waters to US markets. They have a monitoring system in place to prevent introduction of contaminated fish.
Radiation-free tuna: Albacore anglers, ever the gear-geeks, are wondering whether to shop for Geiger counters this year.
The speedy nomadic tuna winter and spawn in temperate waters of the far east and arrive off the Oregon coast in July, having passed Japan and its quake-damaged reactors.
The fleet may rest easier after hearing an assessment from the Western Fishboat Owners Association, a Redding, Calif.-based organization of commercial tuna fishermen from California, Oregon, Washington and British Columbia.
"Ten years of tagging data show that (albacore tuna) do not come anywhere close to the cold waters of Japan at this time of year and it is believed that these ... stocks are currently many hundreds if not thousands of miles away from Japan at this time," the association announced on its website.
"The area where contaminated water was discharged into the sea is along the Japanese shoreline and that water has not transited far off-shore. The leak has been capped and most of the elements that escaped are low weight isotopes with very short half-lives that are not expected to linger in the environment. This diminishing radioactivity will likely dilute to undetectable levels along the Japanese coast and the migratory off-shore albacore tuna are expected to be completely unaffected by this event."
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 2011-04-20 10:23.
So, where is the radioactivity levels in the seaweed. We can detect all day long, the longer you put it in the counter, the lower you can detect (MDA). That doesn't mean it will have an effect on your life.
Here is a good, easy to read paper
on the impact of marine environment from radioactive releases:
http://www.weatheronline.co.uk/daten/weathernews/fukushima/docs/IRSN_Fuk...
Hot Fish?
I have seen nowhere the Gov, EPA or FDA are saying fish greater than (the DIL) 170 Bq/Kg are safe or acceptable. They are testing imported fish. What they are saying about caught (US) fish, is that thaey can't have gotten from japan to the west coast yet. They just don't swim that fast. So if you see or can cite a specific instance of west coast US fish exceeding the limit of 170 Bq/Kg, I would be most interested.
Hot Fish?
So has any organization found a fish with >170 Bq/kg in US waters or US catches? The FDA is monitoring Imported fish (you know, they come on planes and ships) that move fast from Japonese contaminated coastal waters to US markets. They have a monitoring system in place to prevent introduction of contaminated fish.
Might be kind of hard to
Might be kind of hard to cite a fish exceeding the levels since the fish aren't being tested. How about seaweed?
http://www.kirotv.com/news/27510887/detail.html
If its in the seaweed it's probably in the fish, huh?
why test when it could ruin a industry
http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/bill_monroe/index.ssf/2011/04...
(excerpt)
Radiation-free tuna: Albacore anglers, ever the gear-geeks, are wondering whether to shop for Geiger counters this year.
The speedy nomadic tuna winter and spawn in temperate waters of the far east and arrive off the Oregon coast in July, having passed Japan and its quake-damaged reactors.
The fleet may rest easier after hearing an assessment from the Western Fishboat Owners Association, a Redding, Calif.-based organization of commercial tuna fishermen from California, Oregon, Washington and British Columbia.
"Ten years of tagging data show that (albacore tuna) do not come anywhere close to the cold waters of Japan at this time of year and it is believed that these ... stocks are currently many hundreds if not thousands of miles away from Japan at this time," the association announced on its website.
"The area where contaminated water was discharged into the sea is along the Japanese shoreline and that water has not transited far off-shore. The leak has been capped and most of the elements that escaped are low weight isotopes with very short half-lives that are not expected to linger in the environment. This diminishing radioactivity will likely dilute to undetectable levels along the Japanese coast and the migratory off-shore albacore tuna are expected to be completely unaffected by this event."
The Tuna can still become
The Tuna can still become contaminated by eating contaminated Sand Lances or other small fish that have been exposed to radiation.
So, where is the
So, where is the radioactivity levels in the seaweed. We can detect all day long, the longer you put it in the counter, the lower you can detect (MDA). That doesn't mean it will have an effect on your life.
I'm having some trouble
I'm having some trouble following, could you clarify your point?