URGENT REQUEST FROM BRAWM
Turmel: Big Lie of Low Level Radiation
Submitted by KingofthePaupers (not verified) on Sun, 2011-06-19 22:21.
Jct: I think the most important point never mentioned Jay Gould's finding in Deadly Deceit that damage is the square of the reduced distance between you and the particle. One meter away does some damage, 1 cm away is not 100 but 100*2, 10,000 times more damaging. Inside you, a micron away, its not 1,000,000 times more damaging, it's a million squared. So it may not trigger the geiger counter but it does great damage.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Will you please put us at ease about this monster?
Inverse square law not applicable to individual nuclei
- A "point source" of radiation
- The source continues to emit radiation
- There is nothing inhibiting or interfering with the radiation (e.g., shielding)
If these three things hold, then the intensity of the radiation falls off as the inverse of the square of the distance (i.e., 1/r2). However, our internal exposure from the Fukushima fallout comes in the form of individual nuclei (e.g., Cs-137) that get distributed in our body. They do not clump together into a point source in our bodies; they stay distributed in individual atoms throughout some tissue. So #1 is out. Each radioactive atom decays only once. So #2 does not hold. Number 3 is violated when alpha, beta, and gamma rays travel through tissue. Alphas stop almost immediately, and betas travel a little farther, scattering randomly as they go. Gamma rays also scatter, but less than the others. So without any of the three conditions met, the inverse square law does not hold. We don't have a single point source continually radiating inside us; there would be many individual nuclei spread around, each of which decays at most once. And the radiation from each decay does not travel in a nice, straight-line path. This is where health physics comes in. Because damage is done by alpha, beta, and gamma rays, health physicists study the way that they scatter and deposit their energy in different tissues, and they determine how dangerous each decay is. They also study how particular nuclei would get distributed throughout different tissues of the body, and how long they would remain there. The basic model for damage to biological tissue becomes not the inverse square law, but the Total Effective Dose Equivalent, which is the methodology we use in our dose conversions. Mark [BRAWM Team Member]#1 is a mathematical construct
Number 1 is NOT (automatically) 'out'
For inhaled fuel fleas
For radioactive iodine, which 'clumps' in the thyroid
For radioactive particles 'trapped' in the kidneys
Any radionuclide that is differentially adsorbed/absorbed/concentrated or trapped into a particular tissue or organ.
Polonium poisoning such as Alexander Valterovich Litvinenko (Russian: Алекса́ндр Ва́льтерович) or speculatively by the late Yasser Arafat, the Eqyptian born head of the PLO. An exhumation may be in the works. The previously attributed cause of death for Arafat was HIV/AIDS.
#1 is sometimes a player
A true 'POINT Source' does not exist in nature, as it is a mathematical construct.
Hi Mark, This is straight
Hi Mark,
This is straight from the EPA website on inhalation of radioactive particles. It seems in reading this that #2 would be happening. True? Or am I missing something.
___________________________________________________
What happens to inhaled radioactive materials?
Radioactive particles can lodge in the lungs and remain for a long time. As long as it remains and continues to decay, the exposure continues. For radionuclides that decay slowly, the exposure continues over a very long time. Inhalation is of most concern for radionuclides that are alpha or beta particle emitters. Alpha and beta particles can transfer large amounts of energy to surrounding tissue, damaging DNA or other cellular material. This damage can eventually lead to cancer or other diseases and mutations.
Radioactive half-life and dose calculation
I think that statement is mostly referring to radioactive half-life. If several atoms of Cesium-137 are inhaled, they can be inside you for a long time due to the 30 year half-life of Cs-137. This statement applies in both the aerosol case (violate #2) and the "hot particle" case (do not violate #2).
Our dose calculations use standard inhalation exposure dose conversions. These account for exactly what that statement is describing — whatever is breathed in has the possibility of remaining inside your lungs, and it might not decay immediately but only years later. A lifetime of 50 years or more is used to account for the continuing exposure. Special weights are applied for alpha and beta emitters, since each kind of radiation does different amounts of damage.
Mark [BRAWM Team Member]
Boy do those 'Dose Calculations' account for EVERYTHING!
This entire scenario is new- and BRAWM admittedly can't even detect all of the different forms of Gamma/Beta/Alpha radioactive isotopes in their various forms coming from Fukushima. ‘Hot Particles’ were never even supposed to be 'on the menu' or BRAWM would have discussed their potentiality, yes?
Yet isn't it amazing that somehow, there are those who make the claim that we can take into account every 'transpositional variable' which exists between 'human cellular tissue' and 'range of radioactive emission' and all OTHER 'interactive variables' including age, other disease, and OTHER variables of the '360X360 degree reality within which we exist', which affects everything from 'diet to immunity levels', (children playing in puddles who have already have cancer for instance).
Isn't that what is being claimed every time someone clarifies 'We have taken this into account in our dose calculations'?
Regarding these 'calculations which account for everything- especially what we haven't thought of yet', I will tell you this:
On paper? We 'look' like 'Gods'. But in 'reality'? We exist like 'fools' when we fall under the spell of such illusions.
Fortunately, the general populus who was lulled back to sleep with the 'Airplane Analogy' are the only ones who will have to suffer the repercussions of not taking steps to protect themselves.
Outside of that- The BRAWM Team's future is so bright they have to wear shades. They are doing exactly what the industry and establishment would like them to do. It appears that Homeland Security is a great 'fit' for BRAWM and the UCB Nuclear Engineering Dept. They are real Team players.
I wish they were on our team.
BRAWM White Hats
.
Early in the Fukushima disaster, the politicos and media lied like dogs and actively prevented contrary views.
It was difficult or impossible, to sound a warning, on most forums.
Interestingly,BRAWM and Ann Coulter allowed opinions to the contrary. Lying shills were allowed equally open access, but the truth was not actively suppressed. From a moral/ethical standpoint, that is as good as it got in the Fukushima radionuclide storm.
BRAWM defends their profession. Ann Coulter defends her presumed client. OK, everybody deserves a defense.
Therefore, by my lights, BRAWM & Ann Coulter 'wear the white hats'. Of course the moral/ethical bar is so low that ants can walk over it. Still, we must, I suppose, grade on the curve.
That is known as dilution
Throw in a little truth and noone can state that you are a complete liar.
Let me ask yo this: what has BRAWM accomplished besides 'lulling the population back to sleep with the 'Airplane Analogy'?
That is BRAWM's Crowning Achievement and the 'Industry' will thank them handsomely for it for the rest of their careers as long as they never switch gears.
This line I've read of 'BRAWM doesn't have a dog in this fight' is wonderful comedic writing.
LEO the Perfect
;)
The perfect is the enemy of the good.
BRAWM has allowed the truth to be communicated. That is a good thing.
However Leo is 'perfect'.
;)
Saddeneningly
This in the very beginning is why I advised folks to flee. All the emphasis was on diet but the biological half-lives of radioactive isotopes are months; hot particles inhaled may be with you until the end. How many had the courage to save themselves? How many sacrificed life for economics?
Putting it out to BRAWM, is there anything these folks can now do to get rid of or neutralize the hot particles in their lungs? What about a vaporizer using boron-saturated water?
To an extent, we can undergo Physical Remediation
Research Zeolite- it's known as the 'molecular sieve'
http://www.etszeolite.com/
(The powder not the liquid- the liquid cntains only trace amounts of Zeolite)
It's about the best method I've found to remediate the human body as well as soil, water, (Reverse Osmosis purifies water of radioactive isotopes- to what extent I'm not certain).
Read about Chernobyl. It's some of the best info you can be aware of.
For a time there was a 'Post Gazette' story online from Chernobyl which played out this exact same scenario in terms of downplaying the threats to public health. It has since been removed. If it shows up again (it is in B&W magazine format with the headline to the effect of 'Government Officials Lied about Radiation Levels' etc)
Just wow. But look at it
Just wow. But look at it from an American policy perspective. Would you want Obama at the beginning of the crisis telling the American people to migrate South? Not very realistic, is it, nor is it realistic to expect the almost 150 million in Japan to find a new homeland.
Duck behind a Lilac Bush
.
You can do something to increase your survival chances and future vitality.
You can evacuate, seek shelter, restrict outdoor activities, bring the kids inside, change the HVAC filters, switch to bottled water, stock up on safe food, decontaminate as needed...
Strategic Air Command legend, General Curtiss Lemay once testified that upon seeing a nuclear blast, he would "Duck behind a lilac bush" for radiation shielding"
The public can not and will not take prudent measures, if they are deliberately lied to by Obama, other politicians, the press and the speaker circuit (Ann Coulter). There were no exceptions among major opinion leaders. These lies were fatal. These liars killed.
So the American public, and more particularly their children will suffer, and die in droves of cancer and other radiologically induced health maladies.
And radiation, according to
And radiation, according to research, seems to cause more and more damage in future generations. Mutations lead to more mutations to more mutations.
Doctors who smoke
Doctors who smoke can dredge up some of the wildest pseudo-scientific excuses.
Most of the radiation from an Alpha/Beta/Gamma/Neutron source ‘goes the other direction’ and misses us, unless we swallow it or inhale it. Once internalized, we get shot at point blank range. For the rest of its life, or ours, the source never misses.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/vision/isql.html
As one of the fields which obey the general inverse square law, the light from a point source can be put in the form …
E = 1/R2
… where E is called illuminance and I is called pointance. For any description of the source, if you have determined the amount of light per unit area reaching 1 meter, then it will be one fourth as much at 2 meters.
The fact that light from a point source obeys the inverse square law is used to advantage in measuring astronomical distances. If you have a source of known intrinsic brightness, then it can be used to measure its distance from the Earth by the "standard candle" approach.
Mark: Aren't "Hot Particles" different altogether?
A Hot Particle, at least according to Gundersen, lodges in the tissue and meets all three criteria as near as I can tell.
Can you tell us this is NOT happening or whether you even know?
Also, you have stated before that the "energy" matters - so something which emits alpha or beta may do severed dna/genetic damage to the cells in close proximity if their energy is powerful enough (Is this right?).
Nothing seems to make sense if we do not know ALL of what is being absorbed into our internal organs and tissues and you at BRAWM cannot even be sure ...
Hi Bill, you're right that
Hi Bill, you're right that "hot particles" thwart my earlier arguments about criteria #1 and #2, since each particle would be made of many radioactive nuclei. My comments were aimed at the fission product measurements, which has been the focus of our monitoring.
However, I should also add that hot particles still violate #3 from above and don't strictly follow the inverse square law. Hot particles would be made up of mostly alpha-emitting radioactive nuclei. Alpha particles have a very short range in tissue — approximately a few microns, or about the width of a single human cell. So the only effect a hot particle will have is on the cells immediately adjacent to it and no further.
We cannot yet confirm the results that Gunderson is reporting, but we are currently trying to figure out how to test our air filters for them. Also, it still is not clear what the actual health risk is for the inhalation of such particles, or even how radioactive they are.
Mark [BRAWM Team Member]
External Alpha does nothing
External Alpha does nothing and is blocked by a sheet of paper.
External Beta does little and the lightest shielding blocks it.
Ah, but inside the body, they can do great damage
Mark- As usual, thanks for
Mark-
As usual, thanks for the education. I had been wondering about something that you seem to address here and that is the physical size of the cesium isotopes - you mention individual nuclei - is this to say we are dealing with single molecules of cesium oxide or cesium chloride (or whatever form the salt may be)?
Is this always the case, the single molecule scenario?
And do we know anything about the stuff other than cesium - for example, if there are these plutonium or americium particles about (and I'm not saying there are) would they not be larger?
BC
"One meter away does some
"One meter away does some damage, 1 cm away is not 100 but 100*2, 10,000 times more damaging."
The activity of the particles is not measured at 1 meter, but at distance 0. Even one micron away the square of the distance rule still applies.
Internal exposure
Maybe this will put things into perspective.
http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/node/4351
I don't believe BRAWM team is saying that internal exposure isn't damaging or less damaging. You already have signficant internal exposure. Which is "a micron away" and doing whatever damage it's going to do as well.
You seem to put a lot of
You seem to put a lot of stock into these guys. Keep in mind I could probably count on one hand the number of BRAWM members who have taken biology 100, much less cell biology or genetics. Living is one thing, having undamaged DNA after this is a whole different story. These guys are dangerous.
I've seen plenty of
I've seen plenty of equations and tables that prove Keynesian economics works too. Still didn't answer the question at all.
Don't hold your breath for a
Don't hold your breath for a response. These guys are clueless when it comes to the health aspects. Would be like asking your auto mechanic.
Good post. Bump.
Good post.
Bump.
Agreed.
Agreed.
Meant to, but this is more
Meant to, but this is more attention grabbing.......