Milk update (9/27/2011)

Submitted by bandstra on Tue, 2011-09-27 12:17

9/27 (12:17pm): We have posted two new store-bought milk samples with Best By dates of 9/26 and 10/1. We continue to detect low levels of both Cs-134 and Cs-137.

Mark [BRAWM Team Member]

‹ Nearly 8% of monitored Fukushima children... Would this be a safe assumption based on precipitation amounts? ›

Still in the food supply,

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 2011-10-04 12:41.

Still in the food supply, but for how much longer?

Could anyone please provide

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 2011-10-03 16:46.

Could anyone please provide some input as to whether low-fat or skim milk would have less cesium/radionuclides in them? Thanks!

Yes, thanks much Mark for

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 2011-09-30 23:22.

Yes, thanks much Mark for all your continuing hard work!
Updates are so much appreciated.

Mark or BRAWM team: Would

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 2011-09-28 13:03.

Mark or BRAWM team:

Would non-fat milk or 1% milk have less cesium in them? Please advise.

Thanks.

No significant difference

Submitted by bandstra on Tue, 2011-10-04 11:56.

Back in April we tested one low fat milk sample that had the same date as one of the whole milk samples (best by date of 4/21). There was not a significant difference in the activity concentrations of I-131, Cs-134, and Cs-137.

Mark [BRAWM Team Member]

bump

Submitted by charra (not verified) on Fri, 2011-09-30 22:33.

bump

Thanks so much, BRAWM, for

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 2011-09-27 17:48.

Thanks so much, BRAWM, for continuing to test!