Okay, folks: Let's review.
In the wake of the Fukushima disaster -- that is still ongoing, BTW -- and all manner of revelations about TEPCO's gross incompetency, the Japanese government's complicity, the United States's indifference, historical levels of contamination in the water and milk supply and food chain, various energy-industry abuses, media ignorance, etc., etc., etc., I've been as willing as the next raving paranoid whack job to embrace ALL kinds of conspiracy theories, some of which don't sound nearly as "theoretical " as they did ninety short, incredulous days ago. And I am, naturally, somewhat of a skeptic, anyway -- though "cynical" might be too strong a word. So I understand the inclination of some BRAWM Forum contributors toward healthy disbelief and rational caution. But, folks, I really have to say: I think we're in real danger, as a community, of going off the deep end, here.
I've maintained a respectful, thoughtful silence for several days, now, reading through all the active threads and taking everything in, with an increasing unease and sense of impending disaster... and for once, this foreboding has NOTHING whatsoever to do with what's transpiring in Far East Asia. THIS time, my disquiet is all about... well, US, frankly.
Let me paraphrase what I've read here on this board recently:
> The best information, data and analysis on nuclear reactor design and operation, environmental contamination and human radiological health issues are almost by definition likely to come from persons and organizations either directly employed by, or in some way trains, educated or related to, the nuclear power industry. Anything they do or say is therefore suspect.
> Educational institutions with nuclear science programs -- even those that are part of historically independent, free-thinking, non-corporate-leaning environments -- must be in some way financed, controlled, influenced, or obligated to the nuclear power industry, and therefore anything they do or say is suspect.
> All.governments, politicians, and industry watchdog organizations are essentially owned, bought and paid for by the nuclear power industry, and so, anything they do or say is suspect.
> The media are at some level wholly owned, financed or co-opted by unscrupulous omninational capitalist puppet masters with ties to the nuclear power industry. Naturally, anything they do or say is suspect.
And, now...
> Actual MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS with knowledge of, experience in, and highly motivated toward diagnosing radiological illnesses are entirely incapable of doing anything to help patients suffering from acute radiation poisoning, and therefore, anything they do or say is either suspect, or irrelevant.
Anyone care to guess who that leaves us, in terms of "trustworthy" sources of knowledge, information, or action? Here, let me help you: NOBODY.
EVERYONE's corrupt, or biased, or sold-out, or blind, or ignorant, or incompetent. There are NO exceptions, save for the bright, motivated, outspoken people here and elsewhere telling you who NOT to listen to. Now, THEY'RE all just peachy, and you should trust THEM with the lives, medical management and safety of yourself, your spouses, and your kids. Because THEY -- unlike EVERYONE else, who is either a pimp, a whore, or a tool -- are pristine and perfect and blameless.
...Anyone ELSE see something wrong with this picture?
[Sigh] Look, I'm as much a part of the problem, here, as anyone. I've been freaked out at times, too, overwhelmed and shocked and scared by the enormity of knowledge about this event I've acquired... and perhaps more so by what I have so far been UNABLE to learn about it, its effects and its very concerning possible final outcomes. I, too, have modeled and encouraged a healthy skepticism that may have well metasticized into a VERY unhealthy default incredulity. So, I offer an apology for helping to fuel a fire I now see is threatening to burn out of control.
Trust has GOT to begin SOMEWHERE, folks. Everyone must decide for themselves who can and cannot be believed, of course, and I will not presume to lecture anyone on what choices they should make in this regard. I have my own biases, naturally, and I intend to challenge myself to justify them -- in BOTJ directions -- in the coming days and weeks.
But this circular firing squad has GOT to see an end to it, folks. We're getting absolutely nowhere, here, and fast.
Rick Cromack.
Allen, Texas


What's wrong wtih not trusting anyone?
What you are saying about the trustworthiness of sources is totally true, and it applies not only to the issue at hand, but to all issues of controversy.
The best we can do is to collect the information available and use our own knowledge to make decisions, hoping to stay one step ahead of the mindless herd.
GLTA
Amen Brother.
Amen Brother.
Rick- I agree with much of
Rick-
I agree with much of what you have written here. It is easy to get so wrapped up in this thing that the only conclusion one can come to is that we are all being lied and are screwed ten times over.
But then if you back up a little, you see that BRAWM and EPA and CDPH all have reported some pretty realistic info. There has not been a cover-up - anyone wanting know about this event can. The dangers have been underplayed some, but I wouldn't call that a cover-up. Also, sadly, this kind of thing happened before at Chernobyl, and there is info from that to suggest that most in the US will be fine. There will be increased cancers, but they may not even be above the "background noise" level. Yeah, I know, small comfort if you're one of those affected.
For me, the psychological aspect of this has been unreal. I think that to call it an existential crisis would be accurate - the fear, uncertainty, and sadness have shook me to my core, made me feel even more hopeless than before. Sometimes, I have to back up and see that this is just one more craptastic mishap on our way to collapse, but it is not the collapse itself.
Well put...I came to the
Well put...I came to the same conclusions recently. I realized a healthy skepticism and curiosity had become irrational and incredulous. There is plenty of information available and if you allow someone else to interpret it for you chances are that person is doing it for personal gain, NOT the benefit of you and your loved ones. LOTS of helpful info here: http://www.hss.doe.gov/healthsafety/ohre/index.html
a more perfect Union
.
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
We, the Sovereign, have amended our instructions to 'the hired help' 27 times and may need to amend it further, for government of/by/for the people to long endure.
We have many matters to attend to, so our attention is sometimes temporarily averted. For example, notwithstanding recent SCOTUS decisions, the Preamble above does NOT provide for corporate citizenship.
Vox Populi, Vox Dei - (The voice of the people [is] the voice of God)
Rick, what exactly are you
Rick, what exactly are you saying? Not being sarcastic, but I'm not leaving with a takeaway here. Are you just venting or saying we should stop worrying or saying we should stop scaring each other, or what?
I feel like you're coming down off a rollercoaster and you're hoping your words will calm everyone else down now that you're nerves are a bit less frazzled. No? Yes? Are you feeling guilty for overdosing on milk again? LOL, not laughing at you, just at the situation.
Just my analysis of words. Curious about what you really mean.
"EVERYONE's corrupt, or
"EVERYONE's corrupt, or biased, or sold-out, or blind, or ignorant, or incompetent."
- The true hallmarks of fundamentalist ideological thinking. Be it religious, scientific or environmental.
I think we have enough data
I think we have enough data from the current situation and, more important, enough data from previous contamination as a result of events like Chernobyl and the atmospheric nuclear testing era to conclude that the consequences of the Fukushima disaster for the US are going to be negligible.
As soon as I saw the maps of contamination in western Europe after Chernobyl, with levels of fallout that are thousands or hundreds of thousands times more than anything we have seen so far since March, and considering than countries like Germany, Austria or the Scandinavian countries are still there, all of them enjoying longer life expectancies than the US... I don't know, I feel relatively safe, the data provided by BRAWM, EPA and the University of Washington seems to be consistent and I feel kind of stupid for freaking out at the beginning (though the potential consequences of a worst case scenario may have required that reaction)
I'm afraid I could not disagree more with your premise
"I think we have enough data from the current situation and, more
important, enough data from previous contamination as a result of events
like Chernobyl and the atmospheric nuclear testing era to conclude that the
consequences of the Fukushima disaster for the US are going to be
negligible."
BRAWM started utilizing the 'airplane analogy' within a week or so of the
initial event, didn't they? Were the BRAWM Team or anyone else at the Dept.
of Nuclear Engineering aware at that point that the reactors cores had
ruptured? Initially TEPCO covered that up, so I was under the impression
that we all learned that the cores ruptured at the same time: http://anti-
atom.ru/en/node/2189
Such revelations have not given pause to anyone at BRAWM or the entire
Nuclear Engineering Dept in terms of public health assurances? (I find that
hard to believe. Surely there must at least be 'debate' within the Dept.)
The BRAWM Team has relied heavily upon the data from the BEIR VII Report in
terms of defending their positions as regards public health assurances and
the 'airplane analogy'. The BEIR VII report in large quantity, bypasses
Chernobyl and 3-Mile Island Data and reaches back a full 25 years prior to
primarily focus on Atomic Testing data.
Here is the link that BRAWM provides to the BEIR VII Brief- within which I
don't see a single mention of Chernobyl: http://dels-
old.nas.edu/dels/rpt_briefs/beir_vii_final.pdf
I DO see Hiroshima and Nagasaki referenced multiple times, however, along with
the implication that Low Level Ionizing radiation may be 'good for public health'.
I believe that we need to take a very thorough look at the BEIR VII Report
and how it seems to 'bypass data pertaining to Chernobyl' and other similar
events which seem to indicate otherwise. All of this reliance on Atomic
Testing data which was collected '50 years ago' leaves me with the
questions:
Data is still waiting to be analyzed from Chernobyl and in fact is still being
collected, is it not? http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sugexp=ldymls&pq=chernobyl+genetic+ra...
In light of that fact, what reasonable person would conclude that we 'know
everything we need to know' about Fukushima as we are in the earliest
stages of this 'complete failure' as regards 'Nuclear Reactor Safety & Containment
Protocols'?
Why, in the year 2011, has the 'Pro-Nuclear Lobby BRAND of science', chosen
to 'mire itself' within a specific data set collected, 'half-a-century
ago', when there are obvious events such as Chernobyl which would no doubt
tell us much more about our present situation?
Of what benefit is such a 'choice' to the discussion of public health?
Do such preferences in terms of 'selection of data' honor science? Or just
one particular 'brand' of science?
"BRAWM started utilizing the
"BRAWM started utilizing the 'airplane analogy' within a week or so of the initial event, didn't they?"
I never really cared for the "airplane analogy", I just check the amount of contamination in air and soil and food. Compare that to the amount of Cesium-137 fallout in Western Europe and you have and idea of what I meant with negligible. Check for data on nuclear fallout by radioactive Cesium, Strontium and Plutonium resulting from the atmospheric testing era and you would get a clear context in which to analyze the risks of 12 Bq/Kg of Iodine-131 in topsoil samples.
"Were the BRAWM Team or anyone else at the Dept. of Nuclear Engineering aware at that point that the reactors cores had ruptured?"
About that, even the Japanese government said already by 15 march that they were working with the assumption that the cores had melted. And I assume anyone with any knowledge of nuclear engineering could deduce that the fuel had melted as soon as Tepco said that the cores had lost cooling and been exposed for hours during the first days of the crisis.
I couldn't agree more
It doesn't matter if the core in one reactor melted 50%, cores of 4 reactors melted 50%, or the cores of 1000 reactors melted 100%. What matters is how much radiation was released, what isotopes were in that release, and most importantly, how much is reaching the various population centers (both in Japan and elsewhere) and the ocean. Everything else is trivia.
At this point, whether folks agree with the cross country flight comparison or not, that comparison is now irrelevant. The BRAWM team
(Mark specifically) has provided other every day *internal* comparisons. And those comparisons dwarf what we are seeing from Japan.
And to Rick's point, when you believe NOBODY can be trusted, it's usually YOU that are way out of sync with reality. Think about the LONG list of agencies, occupations and military branches. And think about the number of people that would have to keep their mouths shut to cover all of this up. And most of those folks are just like the rest of us. They all live HERE and have families and friends to worry about.
"They all live HERE and have
"They all live HERE and have families and friends to worry about."
Which is exactly why they can't go around jeopardizing their job security.
Yep. Job security over health security
If you took a step back, you would realize how ridiculous that sounds. You are saying that the many thousands of "in the know" government employees and health care professionals are all ignoring their family and friends health just to protect their jobs? And not even telling their family or friends about what they know. Even if *some* did manage to keep quiet, there is no way the majority would. Just try to get even *two* people to keep a secret. Let alone many thousands. It will leak out VERY quickly.
You can't argue with a
You can't argue with a conspiracy theorist. Don't even try. It's not fun.
I would love to hear thoughts as regards these questions
I would love to hear thoughts as regards these questions