Milk vs. other foods - food chain contamination question
I'm hoping someone can answer a question that my husband and I keep coming back to in our discussions about the foods we've been eating in the wake of the earthquake.
The question is this - milk is currently showing varying levels of cesium 134 & 137. According to BRAWM, air sampling is negative for fission products as are rain water samples and a few other (older) food samples. So what is it about cow's milk (and I've read in other places goat and sheep's milk as well) that makes it test positive for radioactive particles when other parts of our food chain do not show any contamination beyond what would be expected naturally? Should consumers expect that the beef they consume would show a similar level of cesium contamination? What about chicken? Eggs?
Where is this radiation coming from if it's not showing up in vegetation? Can anyone tell me (or guess with me) the main path of exposure for cows and other livestock that's causing them to bioaccumulate measurable amounts of fission products, when we're being told (and I'm inclined to trust BRAWM, especially in the absence of other conclusive testing) that these fission products are not showing up in the food chain?
We are trying to make informed decisions about we eat, especially for our two young children, pregnant mom (me!) and baby on the way. But this question keeps coming up and I'm hoping people better informed and more well-read on the subject that I am can help me figure out the answer.
And please, don't just reassure me that this contamination is well below what mother nature dishes out, etc. I've heard plenty of that already. What I am hoping for is someone who can explain to me in laymen's terms, why it is that fission products would show up in cow's milk (and beef???) when it's not showing up in other foods; and what the main avenue of exposure is for the cows vs. everything else people are eating.
Thanks
-citymom
Strawberry testing ?again please.
"And please, don't just reassure me that this contamination is well below what mother nature dishes out, etc. I've heard plenty of that already. What I am hoping for is someone who can explain to me in laymen's terms, why it is that fission products would show up in cow's milk (and beef???) when it's not showing up in other foods; and what the main avenue of exposure is for the cows vs. everything else people are eating."
--------------
Cows exposure is the massive food load they require somewhere from 30 to 70 pounds of grass a day or 3 to 4 percent of there body weight a day from dry feed.simply put cows eat a lot so they quickly accumulate any contaminants in grass or feed.dairies will also use cow poo from feed lot to fertilize their pastures .so imagine a closed cycle .now part two of your question most farms cultivate or till under soil yearly which will dilute contaminants like cesium ,from japan .which is mostly in the top few inches of soil . Plants have many variables with uptake such as tissue type ,root depth ,fertilization ect...hope this helps tdm
---------/
Plant uptake of radiocaesium: a review of mechanisms, regulation and application
http://jxb.oxfordjournals.org/content/51/351/1635.long
--------/////
http://www.cals.uidaho.edu/edcomm/pdf/CIS/CIS1156.pdf
Dairy Manure Field Applications—How Much is Too Much?
Fruits and Vegetables...?
Is it me, or was the direct question as to whether California fruit and vegetables can possibly be "safe" to eat (if soil is contaminated enough to cause cows to produce milk with traces of the biproducts of nuclear fission), never directly, or even partially, answered in this thread???
I know that some of us would still like to know the answer to that question, especially following that "radiocative seaweed" story we all just learned about! Thanks.
It's not just you
Some of the information has been useful...but I don't think I ever really got a direction answer.
And especially given the paper posted above - more information about local produce would be really nice, so that we can make our own, truly informed choices.
-citymom
You're far more likely to die
You're far more likely to die in a traffic accident driving back and forth to the store to get your food than to be harmed by any trace amounts of radiation in it.
Food chain testing
Hello Mark
Will you do more? It's more or less tapered off to zero (besides milk) and obviously many of us remain concerned about other foods: eggs, meat, vegetables of different varieties, grains, fish.
Thank you!
Low levels of cesium in the feed
Hi citymom,
I think the answer to this question is that there continue to be very low levels of cesium 134 and 137 in what the cows are fed, whether stored feed or pasture grass. After Chernobyl, cesium 134 and 137 were detectable in European milk for years because the isotopes continued to be present at smaller and smaller amounts in the vegetation. In the literature, the lingering levels are attributed variously to stored feed and re-uptake of cesium from the soil by vegetation. How much this happens and which routes are more important all depend on the specific region, such as the agricultural practices and soil and grass types.
For example, here is a paper where the author analyzed powdered milk in Austria:
Muck, K. "Longterm reduction of caesium concentration in milk after nuclear fallout," Science of the Total Environment, 162, 63–73 (1995)
They saw cesium in milk for years and said this about it:
Mark [BRAWM Team Member]
Some (maybe?) helpful articles
I am still holding out hope that Mark or someone else from BRAWM will give us some more professional insight here, but they do seem to strategically avoid threads about food safety (those that imply there may be safety concerns anyway) so...
I am continuing to research this because my family and I are trying to make the best decisions we can about what we eat and it's definitely getting to the point where we can no longer really sustain eating the way we've been eating. It's time to make some changes and we're just not sure how to proceed.
I've been looking to what was learned after Chernobyl, which seems like the most logical place to start...
- http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,411272,00.html#spRedi...
- http://www.greenstone.org/greenstone3/nzdl?a=d&d=HASHa1a07609b3e17c3e0b0...
These are mostly focused on the impact closer to the actual event and in the 80's, many of these areas took real steps to try and protect the food supply following this incident (one article mentions the cows being given Prussian blue). Several mention that there is a difference between the actual half life of isotopes like cs137 vs the "biological half life" - the Der Spiegel article says that cs137 tends to leave animals and humans after about 100 days. Of course, if we (or our food) are continually ingesting new doses, this doesn't really matter...we're still being exposed to it constantly. But...it does make me wonder about the safety of eating chicken over other meats, because I think chickens are typically slaughtered before 100 days...isn't it like 10-11 weeks for organic? Again, if their feed is already contaminated, it doesn't matter how old they are because they are receiving some kind of dose every day.
The second article was from one year following the disaster, which is where we are now...and the focus of it is very much on the short term dangers. My family and I stopped eating Northern Hemisphere produce right away as well as dairy, so our exposure to that initial contamination was at least somewhat limited. I hope...
Now my concerns are about how much things like locally (or even just US) grown lettuce, chard, berries, tree fruits, root veggies (carrots, potatoes, sweet potatoes, ginger) and onions and garlic are going to be taking up whatever cs137 (and strontium? Do we even know if this has been found? Has BRAWM been running tests that would detect it?) is left in the soil.
I can't say these articles have given me any additional peace of mind about the way we've been eating for the last year, but they are informative. I do think it's interesting that in 1986, when the Der Spiegel article as first published, they were asking many of the same questions we have been asking about science vs. politics and how much the two might be tainting each other. "Is it really the case that today's science is biased and instrumentalized?" asked Rhineland Palatinate's Minister for the Environment, Klaus Töpfer, on Thursday of last week. "Is science becoming a weapon in party-political disputes?" Do the names of scientists now have to be supplemented with epithets such as "ecologically minded" or "pro-nuclear," like those of politicians?"
And like I said, I still hope Mark or someone from BRAWM would grace us with their opinions/insight on the matter.
Apologies for the long post...I know from threads like this that there are still other people out there who are concerned and trying to stay informed and that's comforting.
I'd still really love to see more food chain testing - can we look at lettuce, chicken, onions, things like that? Also - I am due in about 8 weeks with my 3rd child and since it looks like radiation was measured in mother's milk following Chernobyl, I'm more anxious than ever to see testing on that. Under-supply has never been a problem for me so I would be more than happy to provide samples if BRAWM was willing to test.
still a little baffled...
-citymom
are you sure? that is
are you sure? that is suspicious.
BUMP for Mark
BUMP
Hoping Mark will answer!
BUMP
I'm hoping he'll answer too!
I'm hoping he'll answer too! Thanks to everyone keeping this conversation going in the meantime!
-citymom
Stored feed
Hi City Mom
Factory farmed dairy cattle don't see much pasture and primarily are fed on stored hay that was produced last year. Organic pasture grazed cattle were at first a poor choice for clean milk, but as the season progressed, it was apparent from the BRAWM results that the raw milk achieved MDA many months ago.
raw milk samples:
http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/UCBAirSampling/RawMilkSampling
farmed milk samples:
http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/UCBAirSampling/MilkSampling
As the cows begin to graze on the pasture of this season all the milk samples should achieve MDA.
Thank for just being safe with your kids.
Sam
Thanks for the reply, Sam. My
Thanks for the reply, Sam.
My kids never consumed much milk to begin with (we're rice milk people :-)), and when we did before March 2011, it was raw. The loss of milk hasn't been a big problem for us, it's the other stuff. And if it's true that the reason conventional milk is testing above MDA for fission products is that the cows are being fed grains/hay from last year...this should mean that the grains we eat (corn and wheat) are also contaminated, right? That's where I'm getting stuck. Because we're eating bread, I'm baking with flour (mostly pre-fuku actually, but I know the bread we buy is made with new flour), we're eating corn tortillas. All things that were ostensibly contaminated badly enough (by the rains in March and April?) to cause cows at least to test above MDA...
So again, BRAWM, I know you guys are very busy, but I think most people would really appreciate seeing more food chain testing...especially things like grains, poultry, and come to think of it, rice milk!
Diet-wise at this point, I'm leaning toward thinking it's actually safer at this point to be eating almost exclusively fresh, local, seasonally harvested produce (which is what I used to do before this mess), than it is to be eating meat, eggs, dairy, breads, etc. And probably free range or pastured animals with short lives (less chance to bio-accumulate anything in large amounts) are better to consume than factory farmed? Right? I would love it if someone could provide me with a more scientific argument for why this is the case.
disclaimer: I get that under normal circumstances eating the way I just described (local, organic, free range, pastured, etc) is the obvious best answer...I'm just speaking exclusively from the standpoint (for the sake of this discussion anyway) of avoiding ingesting fallout from Fukushima.
Rice Milk!? That's
Rice Milk!? That's essentially sugar water. Extremely unhealthy. Your family would be much better off drinking raw milk. Just sayin'!
i would be wary of rice, too
...just google "arsenic in rice" or "arsenic in rice milk"...or "arsenic in apple juice" or grape juice or wine...or beer...unfortunately not much is safe to consume in this day and age :/ even organic rice milk and apple juice aren't immune from this sort of contamination (my husband was an avid rice milker, until recently)...
turns out: lead arsenate pesticides used in agriculture have left a nasty legacy (inorganic arsenic) that pretty much doesn't migrate, just sits there on the top, year after year after year...i have been being driven crazy by post-fuku dietary changes, but we're getting to the point now that so much is unsafe to eat, that we just have to bite the (radioactive or chemical-laden) bullet. i drink soy, as does my 5-y.o. and my 6 mo. infant. i know it's not ideal, but it's what they find least repugnant and as mentioned in another post, cows are biomagnifying.
sigh. i just pray that BRAWM is correct in its analysis of the safety of our foods. they claim to have not made any dietary adjustments, even from the beginning. what a mess. :(
Rice from where, Japan?
Rice from where, Japan? Heavily contaminated pools in China? I'd be wary of "rice."
Precisely. This is why we
Precisely. This is why we stopped drinking rice milk after our pre-Fukushima supply ran out. It's why I would really love to see BRAWM do some testing on items like rice or rice milk and soy products.
If I can verify from any of the companies that make rice milk that their rice is domestically grown, then we might start drinking it again (really miss rice milk - and cold cereal!), but until then...none for us.
I read somewhere else that some contaminated rice from Japan is being sold to China and then repackaged as rice from China (which would be...almost as bad anyway, right?)...I'm not sure how true that story is but given all the shenanigans we see with food safety in general these days, it wouldn't surprise me one bit. For now, we're about to use up our last big bag of rice purchased before this whole debacle and from then on it will be organic quinoa for us (grown in Bolivia usually).
-citymom
It has made me look at the
It has made me look at the China Palace restaurant sideways as well.
Lundberg grows some mighty fine rice in NorCal. Do bear in mind that last years crop was out in the rain for a little Fukushima fallout. What levels are in in the rice I cannot say, but that area no doubt received at least a small amount of fallout.
As did much of the country...
BC 3/19/12
Oh dear, BC, as a very
Oh dear, BC, as a very pregnant woman, I miss chinese food so much. But being unsure of ingredients like rice and especially soy sauce (a lot of it is from Japan), Chinese, Thai and Japanese food are all off out of our diets except for what I can make at home. My gastronomically broad-minded 6yo asks me weekly when we can go back to the "sushi restaurant" - she wants california rolls and miso soup. I do too!
We had a friend who worked at the Japanese grocer in Japantown here in SF and they went out of business in December, in part (they said) because the business suffered after the meltdown in Fukushima.
I like Lundberg rices, but I think we'll maybe do a little more research on rice crops, even the domestic ones, before starting to buy again. I'm thinking of trying to wait until the next harvest...
-citymom
Soy milk is good
Immediately after Fukyushima we canceled all dairy.
-we bought 12 1-gallon tubs of ice cream for the freezer
-we bought 24 or so slabs of aged cheeze
-canceled yogurt, sour cream
-we switched to soy milk for cereals for the kids (3 and 9) and for our coffee, tea
Took a bit of getting used to, but once you realize the amount of grass that goes into creating a litre of milk vs soy milk, you will realize you bioaccumulate much less with soy milk.
I would go with almond milk
I would go with almond milk over soy...between the huge problem of GMO soy (unless it's organic, it's almost guaranteed to be GMO) and the problem of where those soy beans might be grown...almond milk is mostly produced from CA grown almonds. IMO it's even harder to get used to than soy milk (it can be a bit heavier than other nut/grain milk), but it's probably safer.
Like I said before, we didn't eat much dairy before, but we've been eating aged cheeses - right now we only get the 2yr vintage cheddar from Tillamook which is delicious. Cheese is sort of a staple in our house. :)
Soy itself is controversial.
Soy itself is controversial.
Yes, soy is predominantly GMO
Yes, soy is predominantly GMO with all that comes with that. I prefer almond milk, a local product in Nor Cal. Superior taste and not so hard to digest. More recently I have began to add local organic soft cheese back into my diet, as the aged hard cheeses are getting close to post Fukushima production dates. I have avoided food products from the midwest because some of the test results have shown contamination 1,000 times higher than in California. It's really about everything we embrace on the west coast: read labels, buy locally produced, eat organic. Irregardless of Fukushima, good food choices are always important. I firmly believe in Proposition 65 and believe that food products that contain radioactive isotopes, even at low levels, fall into this category.
Proposition 65
You stated:
The trouble with saying this is that all foods are radioactive. The most common radioisotope in food is potassium-40, but there are other trace radionuclides as well such as the decay products of Uranium-238 and Thorium-232. Besides food, most other things in our world are radioactive: our bodies, air (because of radon), dirt, and concrete to name a few. But these things do not get Proposition 65 warnings because the exposures are far below the levels "known to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm."
Also, which test results are you referring to that are 1,000 times results in California?
Mark [BRAWM Team Member]
Thanks for the clarification Mark
Thank you Mark for the prop 65 clarification.
The test results I refer to are here on page 25:
http://www.kdheks.gov/radiation/download/2011_ERS_Report.pdf
Milk 4/18/2011 1518 ± 55 I 131 pCi/l
Your thoughts on this are appreciated.
Must be a typo
I remember someone bringing up that report from the state of Kansas here back in November. I just looked at that particular number again and noticed that it must be a typo. That measurement is exactly the same as the column to the left of it, which gives an activity for Potassium-40 of 1518 ± 55 pCi/L. That activity is consistent with their other measurements of K-40 in milk, and with our own, which all amount to ~50 decays per second per liter (Bq/L).
The other measurement of I-131 from that dairy was 3.0 ± 1.0 pCi/L from nearly a month before. It is extremely unlikely that the activity for I-131 could be that large on that date (4/18/2011) from a dairy that measured only 3.0 ± 1.0 pCi/L a few weeks before when the fallout was at its greatest. It is also nearly impossible for milk in the U.S. to have had an I-131 activity concentration that high given the small amounts of I-131 in our rainfall.
So given all that information, besides the small likelihood that two measurements (and their error bars!) would be exactly the same, I think that number is a typo.
Mark [BRAWM Team Member]
Perhaps she should clarify
Perhaps she should clarify "to the exclusion of K-40" as homeostasis already takes care of it.
As for natural uranium, etc. vs. man-made, it really doesn't matter. An isotopic analysis (types and quantity) would be worthwhile -- I like to keep my daily intake of uranium to a minimum.
Fool's Errand
As Mark has stated, most foods, and in fact most materials, are radioactive.
Uranium is one of the most uniformly distributed elements in the Earth's crust.
Attempting to minimize your intake of Uranium is really a "Fool's Errand"; for all intents and purposes, it really can't be done.
If we did an isotopic analysis of the dirt under your fingernails; we would find Uranium.
Soy milk is good
Immediately after Fukyushima we canceled all dairy.
-we bought 12 1-gallon tubs of ice cream for the freezer
-we bought 24 or so slabs of aged cheeze
-canceled yogurt, sour cream
-we switched to soy milk for cereals for the kids (3 and 9) and for our coffee, tea
Took a bit of getting used to, but once you realize the amount of grass that goes into creating a litre of milk vs soy milk, you will realize you bioaccumulate much less with soy milk.