Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Trace amounts of Radiation found in Hilo Milk
#21
Roughly half the world's population lives closer to Japan than we do, if that's any consolation to the chronically worried.
Reply
#22
<http://whatreallyhappened.com/> is posting articles like this one...

"The EPA is monitoring drinking water only for iodine, but not for cesium or other radioactive isotopes and is refusing to answer questions from the press on why so many radiation monitors are offline.

Might be worth a look.

Aloha,
Lee
http://members.cruzio.com/~lionel/event
Lee Eisenstein
http://members.cruzio.com/~lionel/event

"Be kinder than necessary, as everyone you meet is engaged in some kind of strudel."
Reply
#23
Thanks for that link. I've learned so much. Hawaii isn't a state, Obama is somebody's love child and by paying taxes I'm killing Jesus' family.

As far as I can tell (by looking at reputable websites) the EPA does indeed not monitor drinking water for caesium. I assume this has to do with giving the priority to iodine, which is more of a risk (if it was present at dangerous levels) and because it has a much shorter half-life. If there was caesium it would show up in milk, which is tested for it. At any point in time some of the monitors are broken but they don't see it as a problem because the spread is assumed to be even.

Reply
#24
I just did a very rough calculation of the "dose equivalent" based on the measured amounts of cesium-134 and 137 in local milk reported in the OP's link to the Star Advertiser article. "Dose equivalent" is the important number as it reflects the amount of radiation absorbed by biological matter but the numbers are so small I've actually rounded up to make the case worse, but this is what I get:

You would have to drink 400 gallons of local milk to equal the radiation dose you would get flying from Hawaii to the west coast. Therefore I plan to keep flying to California and back while also continuing to drink local milk.



Tom
http://apacificview.blogspot.com/
Reply
#25
My personal cancer risk is much higher from exposure to Radon gas, a common vapor coming up from the ground in Colorado plus my exposure to radiation is already higher at Denver altitude not to mention when you get on a plane its even worse.

BTW we all have a little bit of exposure from the Chernobyl disaster so we probably have a little more room for this one.

I'm coming back in Mid September for 3 glorious weeks.
You all don't mess things up till I get back alright?
Reply
#26
PaulW, Glad you understand the background pertaining to those two statements. Or did you?

Aloha,
Lee
http://members.cruzio.com/~lionel/event
Lee Eisenstein
http://members.cruzio.com/~lionel/event

"Be kinder than necessary, as everyone you meet is engaged in some kind of strudel."
Reply
#27
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24007

good read, sorting the man made apples (isotopes) from the media reported "background" bananas.
Reply
#28
LeeE, what two statements?
Reply
#29
PaulW, Oh yeah, three.

Check the nuke related news links. Updated regularly. Many stories from world press.

Kudus to global research site, or so I've heard.


Aloha,
Lee
http://members.cruzio.com/~lionel/event
Lee Eisenstein
http://members.cruzio.com/~lionel/event

"Be kinder than necessary, as everyone you meet is engaged in some kind of strudel."
Reply
#30
I mentioned those three statements to show how ridiculous that site is.
If you take them seriously, then, well, good luck to you. You'll need it.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)