Observations of the forum responses
So I have a few points I want to make because there are a few things on this forum that bother me.
First, correlation does not imply causation. Every little thing that occurs in the United States is not due to Fukushima. People seem to take common occurrences and magnify them to Fukushima related events. Symptoms of bad allergies and a stomach virus are now symptoms of radiation sickness. This is just crazy. People who get sunburns are now claiming to have erythema which has a threshold dose of 3 Sv (300 rem). The radioisotopes in the air do not cause these things. If they did, these symptoms would have been seen over the past 70 years in rad workers.
Second, not all websites are legitimate places for truthful information. When I was 6, I learned in school about telling the difference between a website that can be trusted, and one that you should question. Many posts link to sites that just post crazy things with no supporting evidence. They never justify the stories and never follow up on their crazy statements later on. Now there are a lot of sites that give out good information, and also sites that bring forth information that is not generally reported by the media. However, posting information from sites that clearly have an agenda, whether pro or antinuclear, should always be taken with a grain of salt.
Lastly, not everyone who defends nuclear energy, power plants, etc. is a shill for the industry.
Shill:a person who publicizes or praises something or someone for reasons of self-interest, personal profit, or friendship or loyalty.
Many people on this site, including the scientists at UC Berkeley are trying to alleviate the fears that people have. No one on the BRAWM team or me that matter have any loyalty to the nuclear industry. We are scientists. The underpaid, overworked, underappreciated segment of the population who love to understand the universe around us. We are not shills, we defend the science that we know. We do not promote some policy.
The beginning point of much epidemiology...
The beginning point of much epidemiology is simple observation and reporting of symptoms, as we are doing here. The symptom sufferers are not saying that the radiation is definitely the case of their symptoms, just noting a correlation, as far as I can see. The next stage would be epidemiological studies--not that I see that happening, given the EPA's apparent failure to collect data (unless they are just not releasing what they have collected). However, epidemiological studies also do not prove causation, they just note correlations. It is up to toxicological studies to show causation (though a glance at any pesticide/chemical assessment will tell you that industry is pretty good at denying that even the clearest effect is caused by the pesticide).
Here we are doing the first bit of this scientific process. Which scientists will step in to do the next phases? We are not holding our breath. So it looks as if, by default, our observations are all the science we are going to get.
As a fellow scientist, I
As a fellow scientist, I applaud BRAWM for this forum and the consistent testing and data sharing they have been doing since the event. I also am so thankful for their comments, for many times they have put things into perspective and put my worried mom mind at ease. My children and family are the world to me...and I am sure that many of the forum visitors are here for the same reasons I am...to get information, data, share, and learn in the midst of a terrifying event that was completely downplayed by the media and government agencies. Thank you BRAWM once again from the bottom of my heart.
On another note, however, I would not discount the sharing of information in the way of personal health experiences within this timeline. Whether they are related or not to Fukushima is yet to be proven...this is quite uncharted territory when it comes to a large population being exposed to low level radiation. I would not call it crazy and question the intelligence of those who post in this way. Fact is, everyone's physiology is different and could react differently to what came over (here lies a big gap, in my opinion..where are the health physicists?). Just skip over if it does not pertain to you, however it could be one of the dots connected later on.
Thank you very much for your
Thank you very much for your thoughtful response. What a contrast to the patronizing tone of the OP's "observation", insulting many well intentioned good people.
I was not trying to insult
I was not trying to insult the people who come to this forum looking for information or asking questions about Fukushima. I was more directing this to the people who claim everything they see around them as a consequence of Fukushima. It is utterly ridiculous to for example pick up and move away because of Fukushima. Most people on the forum are well intentioned, but there are the more conspiracy oriented people constantly posting. These posts are detrimental and prevent more honest discussion of events.
I am struggling with this
I am struggling with this issue of picking up and leaving myself. I don't think it is ridiculous. As a matter of fact, if I was a single person without many ties I probably would have left the west coast early on. With the LACK of information, studies, concern, knowledge, news, warnings...etc, it is obviously a YOYO situation (your on your own). I would not be panicked, but I would just be making a healthier lifestyle choice. However, I have children and I am very worried how this new low level of contamination will effect them in the long run. It's in the food, where they play, where they swim, and in the air when the dust kicks up. We are very settled and to pick up and leave family, friends, school, and a community we are happy in would definitely be no easy task. So I struggle every day with staying or leaving. I wish there was more data/info to reassure me.
Wow. I've been reading this
Wow. I've been reading this forum almost from the start and I couldn't disagree with you more. And even your rebuttal is patronizing.
"I was not trying to insult the people who come to this forum looking for information or asking questions about Fukushima"
Sure you were. That's what even the "conspiracy oriented" people are here for - to ask questions and get information. You just don't like the way they think or correlate, and they are just seeking truth.
As to "utterly ridiculous ... to pick up and move away.." Really? How judgmental can you be, dude? Actually I found most of the reasoning on this forum to do so extremely well thought out. It has prompted us to research much for months, and now do the same, not just due to the Fukushima incident. It's that, combined with all the other critical issues here in the US.
May I respectfully suggest you keep your mind a little more open to thoughts and opinions that to YOU may seem "ridiculous". Holding fast to your version of reality isn't the best way to go through life.
Or, to put a more humorous spin on it, "just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they are not out to get me."
Be respectful and not condemning. We learn more from each other that way.
to wow I have been reading this
Thank you I agree with you and the op needs to be more "pliable" just for his own sake and survival of this man made Fukushima nightmare.
For the op.
If you feel that way, why are you here, just tune into CNN or something. Look to the past. There are literally thousands of examples of hard science discoveries. A few years ago these ideas were extreme or fantastic theories at best.
It is best to keep opening the infinate lotus petals of your mind.
I have seen people question
I have seen people question it, not outright claim it.
However, it is true that if they are in fact claiming it, they would require several triangulating pieces of evidence to show the probable causal direction of the correlation, or show what would appear to be a statistically significant correlation pattern.
Anecdotes are dangerous to rely on, individually. En masse, we get correlational data. Correlational research is more difficult to interpret than experimental research, but since experimental research would be entirely unethical in this situation, and it's been made quite clear that there's no sense holding our breath for the government to step up and use their resources to answer our questions, it would be quite disingenuous to belittle community rough-and-ready approaches the only scientific method still left at our disposal.
That said, of course not every case of stomach flu chronic low level radiation poisoning makes. I still want to hear about people's nausea and weigh the data.