ubc losing credibility
Highest Yet: Cesium-137 levels in Northern California soil hits post-Fukushima peak — UCB blames nuclear weapons tests 50+ years ago
http://enenews.com/highest-cesium-137-northern-california-soil-26-bqkg-c...
Search
Highest Yet: Cesium-137 levels in Northern California soil hits post-Fukushima peak — UCB blames nuclear weapons tests 50+ years ago
http://enenews.com/highest-cesium-137-northern-california-soil-26-bqkg-c...
ALARA - revisited
;)
Apparently, this LOSER has not heard of 'the straw that broke the camel's back'.
The legal terminology, for some shills, is 'maintaining an attractive hazard', which is actionable.
Hormesis advocates and nuclear shills should feel free to sunbathe in an X-Ray machine or swim in a reactor. The rest of us will take some reasonable precautions to minimize our radiation exposure. We know that shills are stupid, liars or more generally both.
;)
Not lying to distinguish between small and significant.
It's not lying to distinguish between small and significant.
The claim was made that fallout and nuclear power represented significant increase
It was shown that the actual doses due to fallout and nuclear power are small.
Nobody claimed the doses due to fallout and nuclear power were zero.
They were claimed to be small, which is contrary to the poster claiming significant
Who mentioned hormesis besides the immediately preceeding poster?
Hormesis wasn't raised as an argument.
Hot Radionuclides
The Fukushima Daiichi radionuclide storm is unendurable for a 50 mile radius about the plant and in great swaths up to 200 miles. This includes a significant portion of Honshu Island and the Eastern coastal waters of Japan.
Signficant, and ongoing health hazards presently extend for a thousand miles or so, from the plant, by land and sea. Major environmental damage, and health hazards are drifting across the Pacific Ocean, toward Alaska, the Mariana Islands, British Columbia, Washington, Oregon. The damage will soon extend to California and Baja.
When the really HOT radionuclides, with short half-lives, such as I-131, were still adrift, the health hazards extended across the USA and thence to Europe.
Yes, I have. Check this out,
Yes, I have. Check this out, it makes the CA levels look like jack....
http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1957/9293/thesi...
Read it all, quite an education.
And if you dig deeper, there is Cs-137 all over, it's just been under the radar. Kinda like now.
As for 43% of people getting cancer, I do not know what to say, I am not am doctor. I will say two things:
1) The K-40 in my backyard emits ~200 times the radiation that the Cs-137+Cs-134 does.
2) And God knows, if there are nasty little heavy metal turds, that is a game-changer. IF.
Have a good evening.
BC
Blair Thesis
@ BC:
Great find! I wonder why it took so long for someone to pursue this avenue. There have been stories circulating for years about the Nevada Test Site weapons testing and its negative impact on the health of those living "downwind" from the test site. It turns out that it is all of us!
I know that I have read this before, but it just really registered with me while reading this document: C-137 is only created in a nuclear explosion or in a lab for medical purposes. The fact that C-137 was present in the air / rain indicated a nuclear explosion from the very beginning! Our government knew there had been a nuclear explosion early on...yet they didn't tell the public. That explains why President Obama took his family to Brazil...in the Southern Hemisphere...before the storm hit the West Coast in March. His family ALWAYS goes to Hawaii for holidays.
Thanks BC!
You are welcome. And yes, we
You are welcome. And yes, we are all "downwind" of the testing era.
BTW, poster below is correct. Cs-137 is not just from nuclear detonations, it is a by-product of reactors as well.
WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!
I know that I have read this before, but it just really registered with me while reading this document: C-137 is only created in a nuclear explosion or in a lab for medical purposes. The fact that C-137 was present in the air / rain indicated a nuclear explosion from the very beginning!
====================================
First it's not C-137; it's Cs-137. "C" is carbon, and "Cs" is Cesium.
Cs-137 is not just created in nuclear explosions. It is also a fission product created by nuclear reactors. Cs-137 is normally found in nuclear reactor waste.
It wasn't a nuclear explosion. The fissile material was too dilute. The hydrogen explosion wasn't focused. The fireball was yellow, and not white.....
Correction
@ Anonymous:
Sorry about the "C-137"...I know that cesium is Cs-137 / Cs-134. It was late last night when I read the thesis...and some of the keys stick on my keyboard. The "s" happens to be one of them. I have to go back and add letters after I finish typing a sentence most of the time. I missed it! Thank you for correcting my error.
energy and cells
While I have done zero research on the subject on which to base my theory...
Note that
K-40 beta is 1311 keV, while the I-131 beta is 606keV and Cs 137 is 662 keV
Radiation damage is largely the result of subatomic ballistics so it stands to reason, I theorize..... that living cells, which are mostly water/empty space, which have evolved with consistent K-40 beta 1311 keV energy and therefore evolved to suffer less damage / more repairable damage that when exposed to radiation in the Iodine 131 606keV and Cs 137 is 662 keV range. Visualize a .27 sniper round compared to a copper jacket hollow point 45.
Hence our seeming long term tolerance to K-40 and the damming epidemiology of comparatively low but off the scale unusual levels of Iodine 131 and Cs 137.
I theorize..... that living
I theorize..... that living cells, which are mostly water/empty space, which have evolved with consistent K-40 beta 1311 keV energy and therefore evolved to suffer less damage / more repairable damage that when exposed to radiation in the Iodine 131 606keV and Cs 137 is 662 keV range.
====================================
Complete BS!!! Radiation "damages" by ionization - kicking electrons out of atoms.
It doesn't matter whether the radiation is "natural" or "artificial"; it does the same damage. If an atom loses an electron by ionization, it doesn't know if the photon that caused the damage was a "natural photon" or an "artificial photon".
A 500 keV photon is a 500 keV photon is a 500 keV photon - regardless of how it was created.
energy
You seem upset. Try to calm down. Being agitated will increase the likelihood of missing the details so relax please.
I will restate:
Just the beta radiation of the primary decay, in simplified and generalized terms, is as follows:
K-40 1311 keV
Iodine-131 606 keV
Cs-137 662 keV
(Note they are different)
Quiet Please !
Ladies and Gentlemen we have in our humble presence a particle physicist. I must say it seems a non sequitur that our physicist is a practicing reductionist. Of course we here are of simple and worried minds so that's really helpful.
heavy investment ?
Are you happy being a reductionist?
"K-40 beta is 1311 keV,
"K-40 beta is 1311 keV, while the I-131 beta is 606keV and Cs 137 is 662 keV"
"While I have done zero research on the subject"
It shows.
hi smarty welcome to the party
Huh ? Not technical enough fur Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 2011-09-08 07:33 it seems?
There are plenty of differences that differentiate radiation from K-40 from I-131 and Cs-137. I simply pointed out ONE that might show why we experience K-40 as not quite benign apples and I-131, Cs-137 and nasty exotic little oranges.
So here's my request. Transmute your (and I will be nice) seeming disdain to an educational intent and lay out what differentiates the radiation from K-40 vs I-131 and Cs-137.
You are very likely better informed than I but until you engage I'll not yield.
So here's my request.
So here's my request. Transmute your (and I will be nice) seeming disdain to an educational intent and lay out what differentiates the radiation from K-40 vs I-131 and Cs-137.
=================================
There's only one thing that differentiates the two and that's the energy of the electron that is emitted. Natural K-40 has a somewhat more energetic electron than "artificial" Cs-137 or I-131. Therefore, the natural K-40 can do somewhat more damage.
But that's it!
The US Department of Energy
The US Department of Energy says this about I-131:
"Because iodine selectively deposits in the thyroid, the primary health hazard for iodine is thyroid tumors resulting
from ionizing radiation emitted by iodine-129 and iodine-131. Historically, the major exposure pathway
has been ingestion of milk from cows grazing on iodine-contaminated crops. Other pathways include
ingestion of fruits and vegetables and inhalation. "
Source: http://www.evs.anl.gov/pub/doc/Iodine.pdf
atomic interactions vs changes in complex biological systems
Anonymous (not verified) ==================== you are a professional of singular personality. You are endeavoring to re frame my theory as an argument of artificial vs natural. This effort to re frame is both artifice and artifact of a professional using a Machiavellian technique. Sigh.
No matter I'll bite.
First off there IS more to the decay process than the energy emitted. Changes in chemistry occur. Sometimes there is a cascade in the decay process and of course the possible subsequent cascading changes to chemical properties and biological systems. This somewhat subtle effect is HUGELY significant in biological systems even at miniscule levels if sustained over a long period. Cs-137, emitted and accumulating over an extended period, constantly cycling in the biosphere because of the constant re uptake (nutrient cycling) and bioaccumulation would be a good example of this.
Ionization has many flavors. DIFFERENT changes are likely to occur in and at the atomic level (resulting in different possible molecular changes in and for biological systems) depending on the energy of the radiation in question. Even at the atomic level It is NOT a two state system.
In the real world of molecular physics, which forms the basis of molecular biology and life, changes to a given molecule that result the ionizing radiation vary widely depending on level, frequency and location relationship AT A CELLULAR AND MOLECULAR LEVEL. So while K-40 tends produce certain chemical changes specific to the level, frequency and location relationship that present from K-40 in a biological system, these changes in molecular biochemistry are less damming than lets say the damage done by Cs (in the same biological system) because Cs concentrates and emits differently and results in novel damage because the biological system has not adapted to.
There are also several other properties of these novel substances that when considered together in synergy create a truly frightening picture. But enough for one day.
Oh, and here's a fun read:
Retention level of Cs-137 and K-40 in some users of an Egyptian nuclear research center.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10355108
Yes - the effects are complex..
Yes - the effects are complex...
But all the complex effects you listed are the same whether or not the radiation is "natural" or "artificial".
You can't point to the effects of "artificial" radiation and say they are "worse" than "natural" radiation effects because of all the complex things that can happen. That complex litany of effects applies just as well to "natural" radiation as it does to "artificial" radiation.
Therefore, why should one be more concerned for an mrem of "artificial" radiation, when one readily accepts 10 mrems of "natural" radiation as a fact of life?
"In the real world of
"In the real world of molecular physics, which forms the basis of molecular biology and life, changes to a given molecule that result the ionizing radiation vary widely depending on level, frequency and location relationship AT A CELLULAR AND MOLECULAR LEVEL."
I'm assuming you haven't done any research on molecular physics either?
assuming
I doubt anyone here cares what you assume. Do have a nice day.
Caught again, huh?
Fabrications and assumptions in lieu of real knowledge does seem to be the "modus operandi".
desparate lying is your pattern
Actually, 'they' are coming up to speed quite nicely.
The actual point, of course, is bioaccumulation foci in particular tissues. Iodine concentrates in the thyroid, which localizes the I-131 damage to the thyroid gland. All the thyroid burnouts, metabolic disorders and cancers associated with I-131 focus at the thyroid.
Cesium-134 and the other serious carcinogens wreak havok in the tissues where accumulation occurs.
Oh and the notion of a 'frequency slot' may have some validity. I have not seen any gamma ray frequency (resonance) studies relative to tissue death and tissue mutations. It is an intriguing notion. And, most certainly, if there is some validity, there would be little or no funding available to pursue that avenue of investigation. The nuclear industry is quite skilled at suppressing any promising research into their deadliest hazards.
perspective on internal emitters
I understand the confusion on this point. There are both simple and complex explanations for the amazing toxicity of Cs-137. It seems that though different in effect Cs-137 operates in in a similar fashion to I-131 which creates its havoc based on a combination of particular chemistry / affinity for certain cells and aprox 600 keV radiation.
The radiation from Cs-137, for complex living organisms, in absolute terms in modern environmental exposure scenarios, is much more damaging than the radiation from K-40.
http://www.irsn.fr/FR/Larecherche/publications-documentation/Publication...
A good read for anyone thinking internally emitted K-40 radiation has biological equivalence with internally emitted to Cs-137 radiation. That assertion has been made by very well trained and educated participants here.... and is utterly wrong.
K-40 and I-131 difference
There is another significant difference between K-40 and I-131, which is that the Iodine is attracted, (or ends up in), the Thyroid. The evidence for Thyroid Cancer due to I-131 is well documented and overwhelming.
I came across this on
I came across this on another website. Someone posted articles containing radioisotope data from Japan all the way back to 1963. They also posted 2 articles, one which shows levels of cesium 137 and other radioisotopes in the US and other countries. These articles are a good read and opens my eyes to what we are exposed to on a daily basis.
-
-
Radioactivity Survey Data in Japan
http://www.kankyo-hoshano.go.jp/en/07/07.html
-
-
Evaluation of cesium 137 and elements intake from daily diets in residents of Kanagawa prefecture, Japan. (2009)
http://jhs.pharm.or.jp/data/55(2)/55_192.pdf
-
-
Contents and daily intakes of gamma ray emitting nuclides 90Sr and 238U using market-basket studies in Japan. (2007)
http://jhs.pharm.or.jp/data/53(1)/53_107.pdf