WHY IS'NT MSM REPORTING ON THE escalating DANGERS of Radiation, UPDATED

April · 01-04-2014, 12:40 PM

WHY IS'NT MSM REPORTING ON THE escalating DANGERS of Radiation from Fukushima

A friend sent me this and it is alarming. Of course we are being lulled into a sense of no big deal but this is a very BIG DEAL and it is happening now. Where is MSM reporting on this???!!!!!
28 Signs That The West Coast Is Being Absolutely Fried With Nuclear Radiation From Fukushima

Michael Snyder
Activist Post

Update: New article addressing some of the critics who say that this information is "alarmist."
Something Is Killing Life All Over The Pacific Ocean – Could It Be Fukushima?

The map below comes from the Nuclear Emergency Tracking Center. It shows that radiation levels at radiation monitoring stations all over the country are elevated. As you will notice, this is particularly true along the west coast of the United States. Every single day, 300 tons of radioactive water from Fukushima enters the Pacific Ocean. That means that the total amount of radioactive material released from Fukushima is constantly increasing, and it is steadily building up in our food chain.

Ultimately, all of this nuclear radiation will outlive all of us by a very wide margin. They are saying that it could take up to 40 years to clean up the Fukushima disaster, and meanwhile countless innocent people will develop cancer and other health problems as a result of exposure to high levels of nuclear radiation. We are talking about a nuclear disaster that is absolutely unprecedented, and it is constantly getting worse. The following are 28 signs that the west coast of North America is being absolutely fried with nuclear radiation from Fukushima…

1. Polar bears, seals and walruses along the Alaska coastline are suffering from fur loss and open sores…

Wildlife experts are studying whether fur loss and open sores detected in nine polar bears in recent weeks is widespread and related to similar incidents among seals and walruses.

The bears were among 33 spotted near Barrow, Alaska, during routine survey work along the Arctic coastline. Tests showed they had “alopecia, or loss of fur, and other skin lesions,” the U.S. Geological Survey said in a statement.

2. There is an epidemic of sea lion deaths along the California coastline…

At island rookeries off the Southern California coast, 45 percent of the pups born in June have died, said Sharon Melin, a wildlife biologist for the National Marine Fisheries Service based in Seattle. Normally, less than one-third of the pups would die. It’s gotten so bad in the past two weeks that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration declared an “unusual mortality event.”

3. Along the Pacific coast of Canada and the Alaska coastline, the population of sockeye salmon is at a historic low. Many are blaming Fukushima.

4. Something is causing fish all along the west coast of Canada to bleed from their gills, bellies and eyeballs.

5. A vast field of radioactive debris from Fukushima that is approximately the size of California has crossed the Pacific Ocean and is starting to collide with the west coast.

6. It is being projected that the radioactivity of coastal waters off the U.S. west coast could double over the next five to six years.

7. Experts have found very high levels of cesium-137 in plankton living in the waters of the Pacific Ocean between Hawaii and the west coast.

8. One test in California found that 15 out of 15 bluefin tuna were contaminated with radiation from Fukushima.

9. Back in 2012, the Vancouver Sun reported that cesium-137 was being found in a very high percentage of the fish that Japan was selling to Canada…

• 73 percent of mackerel tested
• 91 percent of the halibut
• 92 percent of the sardines
• 93 percent of the tuna and eel
• 94 percent of the cod and anchovies
• 100 percent of the carp, seaweed, shark and monkfish

10. Canadian authorities are finding extremely high levels of nuclear radiation in certain fish samples…

Some fish samples tested to date have had very high levels of radiation: one sea bass sample collected in July, for example, had 1,000 becquerels per kilogram of cesium.

11. Some experts believe that we could see very high levels of cancer along the west coast just from people eating contaminated fish…

“Look at what’s going on now: They’re dumping huge amounts of radioactivity into the ocean — no one expected that in 2011,” Daniel Hirsch, a nuclear policy lecturer at the University of California-Santa Cruz, told Global Security Newswire. “We could have large numbers of cancer from ingestion of fish.”

12. BBC News recently reported that radiation levels around Fukushima are “18 times higher” than previously believed.

13. An EU-funded study concluded that Fukushima released up to 210 quadrillion becquerels of cesium-137 into the atmosphere.

14. Atmospheric radiation from Fukushima reached the west coast of the United States within a few days back in 2011.

15. At this point, 300 tons of contaminated water is pouring into the Pacific Ocean from Fukushima every single day.

16. A senior researcher of marine chemistry at the Japan Meteorological Agency’s Meteorological Research Institute says that “30 billion becquerels of radioactive cesium and 30 billion becquerels of radioactive strontium” are being released into the Pacific Ocean from Fukushima every single day.

17. According to Tepco, a total of somewhere between 20 trillion and 40 trillion becquerels of radioactive tritium have gotten into the Pacific Ocean since the Fukushima disaster first began.

18. According to a professor at Tokyo University, 3 gigabecquerels of cesium-137 are flowing into the port at Fukushima Daiichi every single day.

19. It has been estimated that up to 100 times as much nuclear radiation has been released into the ocean from Fukushima than was released during the entire Chernobyl disaster.

20. One recent study concluded that a very large plume of cesium-137 from the Fukushima disaster will start flowing into U.S. coastal waters early next year…

Ocean simulations showed that the plume of radioactive cesium-137 released by the Fukushima disaster in 2011 could begin flowing into U.S. coastal waters starting in early 2014 and peak in 2016.

21. It is being projected that significant levels of cesium-137 will reach every corner of the Pacific Ocean by the year 2020.

22. It is being projected that the entire Pacific Ocean will soon “have cesium levels 5 to 10 times higher” than what we witnessed during the era of heavy atomic bomb testing in the Pacific many decades ago.

23. The immense amounts of nuclear radiation getting into the water in the Pacific Ocean has caused environmental activist Joe Martino to issue the following warning…

Your days of eating Pacific Ocean fish are over.

24. The Iodine-131, Cesium-137 and Strontium-90 that are constantly coming from Fukushima are going to affect the health of those living the the northern hemisphere for a very, very long time. Just consider what Harvey Wasserman had to say about this…

Iodine-131, for example, can be ingested into the thyroid, where it emits beta particles (electrons) that damage tissue. A plague of damaged thyroids has already been reported among as many as 40 percent of the children in the Fukushima area. That percentage can only go higher. In developing youngsters, it can stunt both physical and mental growth. Among adults it causes a very wide range of ancillary ailments, including cancer.

Strontium-90’s half-life is around 29 years. It mimics calcium and goes to our bones.

25. According to a recent Planet Infowars report, the California coastline is being transformed into “a dead zone”…

The California coastline is becoming like a dead zone.

If you haven’t been to a California beach lately, you probably don’t know that the rocks are unnaturally CLEAN – there’s hardly any kelp, barnacles, sea urchins, etc. anymore and the tide pools are similarly eerily devoid of crabs, snails and other scurrying signs of life… and especially as compared to 10 – 15 years ago when one was wise to wear tennis shoes on a trip to the beach in order to avoid cutting one’s feet on all the STUFF of life – broken shells, bones, glass, driftwood, etc.

There are also days when I am hard-pressed to find even a half dozen seagulls and/or terns on the county beach.

You can still find a few gulls trolling the picnic areas and some of the restaurants (with outdoor seating areas) for food, of course, but, when I think back to 10 – 15 years ago, the skies and ALL the beaches were literally filled with seagulls and the haunting sound of their cries both day and night…

NOW it’s unnaturally quiet.

26. A study conducted last year came to the conclusion that radiation from the Fukushima nuclear disaster could negatively affect human life along the west coast of North America from Mexico to Alaska “for decades”.

27. According to the Wall Street Journal, it is being projected that the cleanup of Fukushima could take up to 40 years to complete.

28. Yale Professor Charles Perrow is warning that if the cleanup of Fukushima is not handled with 100% precision that humanity could be threatened "for thousands of years"…

Conditions in the unit 4 pool, 100 feet from the ground, are perilous, and if any two of the rods touch it could cause a nuclear reaction that would be uncontrollable. The radiation emitted from all these rods, if they are not continually cool and kept separate, would require the evacuation of surrounding areas including Tokyo. Because of the radiation at the site the 6,375 rods in the common storage pool could not be continuously cooled; they would fission and all of humanity will be threatened, for thousands of years.

Are you starting to understand why so many people are so deeply concerned about what is going on at Fukushima?

For much more on all of this, please check out the video posted below…

http://www.activistpost.com/2013/10/...-is-being.html

Last year, scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory and 3 scientists from the GEOMAR Research Center for Marine Geosciences showed that radiation on the West Coast of North America could end up being 10 times higher than in Japan:
After 10 years the concentrations become nearly homogeneous over the whole Pacific, with higher values in the east, extending along the North American coast with a maximum (~1 × 10−4) off Baja California.
***
With caution given to the various idealizations (unknown actual oceanic state during release, unknown release area, no biological effects included, see section 3.4), the following conclusions may be drawn. (i) Dilution due to swift horizontal and vertical dispersion in the vicinity of the energetic Kuroshio regime leads to a rapid decrease of radioactivity levels during the first 2 years, with a decline of near-surface peak concentrations to values around 10 Bq m−3 (based on a total input of 10 PBq). The strong lateral dispersion, related to the vigorous eddy fields in the mid-latitude western Pacific, appears significantly under-estimated in the non-eddying (0.5°) model version. (ii) The subsequent pace of dilution is strongly reduced, owing to the eastward advection of the main tracer cloud towards the much less energetic areas of the central and eastern North Pacific. (iii) The magnitude of additional peak radioactivity should drop to values comparable to the pre-Fukushima levels after 6–9 years (i.e. total peak concentrations would then have declined below twice pre-Fukushima levels). (iv) By then the tracer cloud will span almost the entire North Pacific, with peak concentrations off the North American coast an order-of-magnitude higher than in the western Pacific.

http://www.isidewith.com/article/fukushima-is-here-nuclear-radiation-on-the-west-coast-from-cali

April · 01-04-2014, 12:42 PM

Charles Perrow

Emeritus Professor of Sociology, Yale University

Fukushima Forever

Recent disclosures of tons of radioactive water from the damaged Fukushima reactors spilling into the ocean are just the latest evidence of the continuing incompetence of the Japanese utility, TEPCO. The announcement that the Japanese government will step in is also not reassuring since it was the Japanese government that failed to regulate the utility for decades. But, bad as it is, the current contamination of the ocean should be the least of our worries. The radioactive poisons are expected to form a plume that will be carried by currents to coast of North America. But the effects will be small, adding an unfortunate bit to our background radiation. Fish swimming through the plume will be affected, but we can avoid eating them.

Much more serious is the danger that the spent fuel rod pool at the top of the nuclear plant number four will collapse in a storm or an earthquake, or in a failed attempt to carefully remove each of the 1,535 rods and safely transport them to the common storage pool 50 meters away. Conditions in the unit 4 pool, 100 feet from the ground, are perilous, and if any two of the rods touch it could cause a nuclear reaction that would be uncontrollable. The radiation emitted from all these rods, if they are not continually cool and kept separate, would require the evacuation of surrounding areas including Tokyo. Because of the radiation at the site the 6,375 rods in the common storage pool could not be continuously cooled; they would fission and all of humanity will be threatened, for thousands of years.

Fukushima is just the latest episode in a dangerous dance with radiation that has been going on for 68 years. Since the atomic bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima in 1945 we have repeatedly let loose plutonium and other radioactive substances on our planet, and authorities have repeatedly denied or trivialized their dangers. The authorities include national governments (the U.S., Japan, the Soviet Union/ Russia, England, France and Germany); the worldwide nuclear power industry; and some scientists both in and outside of these governments and the nuclear power industry. Denials and trivialization have continued with Fukushima. (Documentation of the following observations can be found in my piece in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, upon which this article is based.) (Perrow 2013)

In 1945, shortly after the bombing of two Japanese cities, the New York Times headline read: "Survey Rules Out Nagasaki Dangers"; soon after the 2011 Fukushima disaster it read "Experts Foresee No Detectable Health Impact from Fukushima Radiation." In between these two we had experts reassuring us about the nuclear bomb tests, plutonium plant disasters at Windscale in northern England and Chelyabinsk in the Ural Mountains, and the nuclear power plant accidents at Three Mile Island in the United States and Chernobyl in what is now Ukraine, as well as the normal operation of nuclear power plants.

Initially the U.S. Government denied that low-level radiation experienced by thousands of Japanese people in and near the two cities was dangerous. In 1953, the newly formed Atomic Energy Commission insisted that low-level exposure to radiation "can be continued indefinitely without any detectable bodily change." Biologists and other scientists took exception to this, and a 1956 report by the National Academy of Scientists, examining data from Japan and from residents of the Marshall Islands exposed to nuclear test fallout, successfully established that all radiation was harmful. The Atomic Energy Commission then promoted a statistical or population approach that minimized the danger: the damage would be so small that it would hardly be detectable in a large population and could be due to any number of other causes. Nevertheless, the Radiation Research Foundation detected it in 1,900 excess deaths among the Japanese exposed to the two bombs. (The Department of Homeland Security estimated only 430 cancer deaths).

Besides the uproar about the worldwide fallout from testing nuclear weapons, another problem with nuclear fission soon emerged: a fire in a British plant making plutonium for nuclear weapons sent radioactive material over a large area of Cumbria, resulting in an estimated 240 premature cancer deaths, though the link is still disputed. The event was not made public and no evacuations were ordered. Also kept secret, for over 25 years, was a much larger explosion and fire, also in 1957, at the Chelyabinsk nuclear weapons processing plant in the eastern Ural Mountains of the Soviet Union. One estimate is that 272,000 people were irradiated; lakes and streams were contaminated; 7,500 people were evacuated; and some areas still are uninhabitable. The CIA knew of it immediately, but they too kept it secret. If a plutonium plant could do that much damage it would be a powerful argument for not building nuclear weapons.

Powerful arguments were needed, due to the fallout from the fallout from bombs and tests. Peaceful use became the mantra. Project Plowshares, initiated in 1958, conducted 27 "peaceful nuclear explosions" from 1961 until the costs as well as public pressure from unforeseen consequences ended the program in 1975. The Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission indicated Plowshares' close relationship to the increasing opposition to nuclear weapons, saying that peaceful applications of nuclear explosives would "create a climate of world opinion that is more favorable to weapons development and tests" (emphasis supplied). A Pentagon official was equally blunt, saying in 1953, "The atomic bomb will be accepted far more readily if at the same time atomic energy is being used for constructive ends." The minutes of a National Security Council in 1953 spoke of destroying the taboo associated with nuclear weapons and "dissipating" the feeling that we could not use an A-bomb.

More useful than peaceful nuclear explosions were nuclear power plants, which would produce the plutonium necessary for atomic weapons as well as legitimating them. Nuclear power plants, the daughter of the weapons program -- actually its "bad seed" --f was born and soon saw first fruit with the1979 Three Mile Island accident. Increases in cancer were found but the Columbia University study declared that the level of radiation from TMI was too low to have caused them, and the "stress" hypothesis made its first appearance as the explanation for rises in cancer. Another university study disputed this, arguing that radiation caused the increase, and since a victim suit was involved, it went to a Federal judge who ruled in favor of stress. A third, larger study found "slight" increases in cancer mortality and increased risk breast and other cancers, but found "no consistent evidence" of a "significant impact." Indeed, it would be hard to find such an impact when so many other things can cause cancer, and it is so widespread. Indeed, since stress can cause it, there is ample ambiguity that can be mobilized to defend nuclear power plants.

Ambiguity was mobilized by the Soviet Union after the 1987 Chernobyl disaster. Medical studies by Russian scientists were suppressed, and doctors were told not to use the designation of leukemia in health reports. Only after a few years had elapsed did any serious studies acknowledge that the radiation was serious. The Soviet Union forcefully argued that the large drops in life expectancy in the affected areas were due to not just stress, but lifestyle changes. The International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA), charged with both promoting nuclear power and helping make it safe, agreed, and mentioned such things as obesity, smoking, and even unprotected sex, arguing that the affected population should not be treated as "victims" but as "survivors." The count of premature deaths has varied widely, ranging from 4,000 in the contaminated areas of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia from UN agencies, while Greenpeace puts it at 200,000. We also have the controversial worldwide estimate of 985,000 from Russian scientists with access to thousands of publications from the affected regions.

Even when nuclear power plants are running normally they are expected to release some radiation, but so little as to be harmless. Numerous studies have now challenged that. When eight U.S. nuclear plants in the U.S. were closed in 1987 they provided the opportunity for a field test. Two years later strontium-90 levels in local milk declined sharply, as did birth defects and death rates of infants within 40 miles of the plants. A 2007 study of all German nuclear power plants saw childhood leukemia for children living less than 3 miles from the plants more than double, but the researchers held that the plants could not cause it because their radiation levels were so low. Similar results were found for a French study, with a similar conclusion; it could not be low-level radiation, though they had no other explanation. A meta-study published in 2007 of 136 reactor sites in seven countries, extended to include children up to age 9, found childhood leukemia increases of 14 percent to 21 percent.

Epidemiological studies of children and adults living near the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant will face the same obstacles as earlier studies. About 40 percent of the aging population of Japan will die of some form of cancer; how can one be sure it was not caused by one of the multiple other causes? It took decades for the effects of the atomic bombs and Chernobyl to clearly emblazon the word "CANCER" on these events. Almost all scientists finally agree that the dose effects are linear, that is, any radiation added to natural background radiation, even low-levels of radiation, is harmful. But how harmful?

University professors have declared that the health effects of Fukushima are "negligible," will cause "close to no deaths," and that much of the damage was "really psychological." Extensive and expensive follow-up on citizens from the Fukushima area, the experts say, is not worth it. There is doubt a direct link will ever be definitively made, one expert said. The head of the U.S. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, said: "There's no opportunity for conducting epidemiological studies that have any chance of success....The doses are just too low." We have heard this in 1945, at TMi, at Chernobyl, and for normally running power plants. It is surprising that respected scientists refuse to make another test of such an important null hypothesis: that there are no discernible effects of low-level radiation.

Not surprisingly, a nuclear power trade group announced shortly after the March, 2011 meltdown at Fukushima (the meltdown started with the earthquake, well before the tsunami hit), that "no health effects are expected" as a result of the events. UN agencies agree with them and the U.S. Council. The leading UN organization on the effects of radiation concluded "Radiation exposure following the nuclear accident at Fukushima-Daiichi did not cause any immediate health effects. It is unlikely to be able to attribute any health effects in the future among the general public and the vast majority of workers." The World Health Organization stated that while people in the United States receive about 6.5 millisieverts per year from sources including background radiation and medical procedures, only two Japanese communities had effective dose rates of 10 to 50 millisieverts, a bit more than normal.

However, other data contradict the WHO and other UN agencies. The Japanese science and technology ministry (MEXT) indicated that a child in one community would have an exposure 100 times the natural background radiation in Japan, rather than a bit more than normal. A hospital reported that more than half of the 527 children examined six months after the disaster had internal exposure to cesium-137, an isotope that poses great risk to human health. A French radiological institute found ambient dose rates 20 to 40 times that of background radiation and in the most contaminated areas the rates were even 10 times those elevated dose rates. The Institute predicts and excess cancer rate of 2 percent in the first year alone. Experts not associated with the nuclear industry or the UN agencies currently have estimated from 1,000 to 3,000 cancer deaths. Nearly two years after the disaster the WHO was still declaring that any increase in human disease "is likely to remain below detectable levels." (It is worth noting that the WHO still only releases reports on radiation impacts in consultation with the International Atomic Energy Agency.)

In March 2013, the Fukushima Prefecture Health Management Survey reported examining 133,000 children using new, highly sensitive ultrasound equipment. The survey found that 41 percent of the children examined had cysts of up to 2 centimeters in size and lumps measuring up to 5 millimeters on their thyroid glands, presumably from inhaled and ingested radioactive iodine. However, as we might expect from our chronicle, the survey found no cause for alarm because the cysts and lumps were too small to warrant further examination. The defense ministry also conducted an ultrasound examination of children from three other prefectures distant from Fukushima and found somewhat higher percentages of small cysts and lumps, adding to the argument that radiation was not the cause. But others point out that radiation effects would not be expected to be limited to what is designated as the contaminated area; that these cysts and lumps, signs of possible thyroid cancer, have appeared alarmingly soon after exposure; that they should be followed up since it takes a few years for cancer to show up and thyroid cancer is rare in children; and that a control group far from Japan should be tested with the same ultrasound technics.

The denial that Fukushima has any significant health impacts echoes the denials of the atomic bomb effects in 1945; the secrecy surrounding Windscale and Chelyabinsk; the studies suggesting that the fallout from Three Mile Island was, in fact, serious; and the multiple denials regarding Chernobyl (that it happened, that it was serious, and that it is still serious).

As of June, 2013, according to a report in The Japan Times, 12 of 175,499 children tested had tested positive for possible thyroid cancer, and 15 more were deemed at high risk of developing the disease. For a disease that is rare, this is high number. Meanwhile, the U.S. government is still trying to get us to ignore the bad seed. June 2012, the U.S. Department of Energy granted $1.7 million to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to address the "difficulties in gaining the broad social acceptance" of nuclear power.

Perrow, Charles. 2013. "Nuclear denial: From Hiroshima to Fukushima." Bulletin of Atomic Scientists 69(5):56-67.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/charle...b_3941589.html

April · 01-04-2014, 12:42 PM

Cesium contamination increasing in water at port of Fukushima plant

Next ArticleFUKUSHIMA WATER CRISIS: Water recycling system urgently needed, ex-chairman of U.S. nuclear watchdog says

THE ASAHI SHIMBUN
Tokyo Electric Power Co. announced Oct. 12 that it has detected a rising level of radioactive cesium in seawater sampled from the mouth of the harbor of the devastated Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant, measuring a combined 10 becquerels of cesium-134 and cesium-137 per liter.

The level is the highest since the plant operator began sampling water in June at the mouth of the port, which marks the boundary between the harbor around the plant and the ocean.

At the plant, a vast amount of contaminated water that includes radioactive substances has been discharging into the sea since the nuclear disaster following the Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami on March 11, 2011.

On Oct. 11, TEPCO said that it recorded 2.7 becquerels of cesium-134 and 7.3 becquerels of cesium-137 per liter at the port mouth. Samples taken a day earlier were below the measurable limits of 1.1 becquerels of cesium-134 and 0.9 becquerel of cesium-137 per liter, the company said.

The previous record amount of radioactive cesium detected at the mouth of the harbor was 1.6 becquerels of cesium-134 and 4.7 becquerels of cesium-137 per liter in water sampled on Aug. 19.
World Health Organization guidelines advise the maximum level of radioactivity in drinking water to be 10 becquerels per liter or less. But TEPCO officials said that the environmental impact of the level of cesium detected on Oct. 11 is negligible.

On Oct. 8, the company also detected 1.4 becquerels of cesium-137 from seawater sampled 1 kilometer off the mouth of the port.

Meanwhile, TEPCO measured 320,000 becquerels of tritium, a radioactive isotope of hydrogen, per liter from water sampled from an observation well on Oct. 10 located near a storage tank, from which the leakage of 300 tons of highly contaminated water was discovered in August.

About 1,000 storage tanks are holding the ever-increasing volume of highly toxic water left after being used to cool the reactors.

It marked the first time that water containing 300,000 or more becquerels of tritium per liter was detected from groundwater sampled from the compound of the Fukushima No. 1 plant.

It is more than five times the legally allowed maximum level of tritium contamination--60,000 becquerels per liter--that could be released into the ocean.
http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311dis...AJ201310130062

***

April · 01-04-2014, 12:44 PM

TEPCO: New leaks found in barriers surrounding water storage tanks in Fukushima

December 23, 2013
THE ASAHI SHIMBUN
Barriers surrounding storage tanks of radioactive water at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant were found to have four leaks in two tank areas, operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. said.The company estimated that a maximum of 1.6 tons and 1 ton of contaminated water leaked from two spots of a barrier at one storage tank area on Dec. 21 and Dec. 22, respectively.

Radioactive strontium measuring 190 becquerels per liter, exceeding TEPCO’s tentative limit of less than 10 becquerels, was detected in water at the location on Dec. 22.

An estimated 0.8 ton of water leaked from two spots at a different barrier surrounding storage tanks located to the southeast. Three becquerels per liter of radioactive strontium were detected from water in this barrier.

TEPCO officials said the leakage was found mainly in the vicinity of concrete joints of the barriers surrounding the storage tanks of highly contaminated water.

http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311dis...AJ201312230058

April · 01-04-2014, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by Kiara

That is pretty frightening. Mankind has managed to screw up the air we breathe, the food we eat and our water, all the elements we need in which to survive.

It is very frightening Kiara and it is ongoing more and more toxic radiation is spilling into the ocean going EVERYWHERE and to make matters worse......we have radiation spilling into this country from this disaster that is ongoing and our government is forcing inferior healthcare on us which a part of it will decides who lives and who dies....it is no time to be sick and at the mercy of this regime. This is very unsettling and everyone needs to be checking out the area where they live especially if they live on the coast. MSM should be all over this...but of course they are not.

April · 01-04-2014, 12:49 PM

Fukushima update - North American food supply poisoned along Pacific Coast

by: Carolanne Wright(NaturalNews) If you live on the West Coast of the U.S. or Canada, you may want to reconsider your water filtration method as well as how you select and prepare food. Evidently, the nightmare of Fukushima is far from over - another 16 million years to be exact. Due to the astonishingly long half-life of iodine-129, the whole ecosystem of the Pacific Coast will be contaminated pretty much forever.Among other dangerous radioactive isotopes released from the Fukushima meltdown, iodine-129 also spewed forth from the damaged reactor. Incredibly, this isotope has a half-life of 16 million years. Essentially, the entire West Coast food supply of North America will be contaminated with radiation for unlimited generations. We have fundamentally entered into a new way of life - one that takes a giant leap toward illness, disease and heightened mortality rates.

Consider the water supply. Not only does it provide drinking water for humans and animals, but it also irrigates crops. When the supply is contaminated, it influences everything. According to a public health statement made by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR):

"Iodine in the oceans enters the air from sea spray or as iodine gases. Once in the air, iodine can combine with water or with particles in the air and can enter the soil and surface water, or land on vegetation when these particles fall to the ground or when it rains. Iodine can remain in soil for a long time because it combines with organic material in the soil. It can also be taken up by plants that grow in the soil. Cows or other animals that eat these plants will take up the iodine in the plants. Iodine that enters surface water can reenter the air as iodine gases."

The question is, does radioactive iodine spread in the same manner as its natural counterpart? Unfortunately, the answer is an unequivocal "yes." The agency continues:

"Radioactive iodine also forms naturally from chemical reactions high in the atmosphere. Most radioactive forms of iodine change very quickly (seconds to days) to stable elements that are not radioactive. However, one form, 129I, changes very slowly (millions of years), and its levels build up in the environment."

Before packing up and relocating to Antarctica, a few options are available that can drastically reduce exposure to these harmful elements.

Protect and detoxify

Here are several precautions that can help shield individuals from a radioactive food supply:

- View all fish and crustaceans from the Pacific Ocean as tainted.

- Always use filtered water for cooking and drinking.

- Pay attention to the origin of dairy.

- Wash any produce thoroughly with natural soap and rinse with purified water.

- Avoid meat from contaminated regions (including wild game).

Another level of defense is explained in the article, Remove radiation from your produce with Calcium Bentonite Clay:

"You can add Calcium Bentonite Clay to your milk and drinking water if you're concerned about the possibility of contamination there as well. Add approximately 1 ounce of liquid Calcium Bentonite Clay to a gallon of organic raw milk or water. Some people prefer to let the clay settle to the bottom of the liquid and discard that portion, while others prefer to shake it up and drink them together. Either is fine."

All in all, it truly is a sad state of affairs when the idea of donning a hazmat suit simply to handle our food is not as outrageous as it once had been.

Sources for this article include:

http://www.psmag.com/science/an-iodine-chaser-3523/

http://hpschapters.org/northcarolina/NSDS/iodine.pdf

http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/chart/decays...c=129I&unc=nds

http://www.naturalnews.com

http://hpschapters.org/northcarolina/NSDS/iodine.pdf

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/tfacts158.pdf

http://www.naturalnews.com

About the author:
Carolanne enthusiastically believes if we want to see change in the world, we need to be the change. As a nutritionist, natural foods chef and wellness coach, Carolanne has encouraged others to embrace a healthy lifestyle of organic living, gratefulness and joyful orientation for over 13 years. Through her website www.Thrive-Living.net she looks forward to connecting with other like-minded people who share a similar vision.

Find at Diaspora: thriveliving@joindiaspora.com

http://www.naturalnews.com/041200_fu...ated_food.html

April · 01-04-2014, 12:50 PM

Death of the Pacific. Fukushima Debris soon to hit American Shores

Yoichi Shimatsu (4M) , - An unstoppable tide of radioactive trash and chemical waste from Fukushima is pushing ever closer to North America.
An estimated 20 million tons of smashed timber, capsized boats and industrial wreckage is more than halfway across the ocean, based on sightings off Midway by a Russian ship’s crew. Safe disposal of the solid waste will be a monumental task, but the greater threat lies in the invisible chemical stew mixed with sea water.

This new triple disaster floating from northeast Japan is an unprecedented nuclear, biological and chemical (NBC) contamination event. Radioactive isotopes cesium and strontium are by now in the marine food chain, moving up the bio-ladder from plankton to invertebrates like squid and then into fish like salmon and halibut.
Sea animals are also exposed to the millions of tons of biological waste from pig farms and untreated sludge from tsunami-engulfed coast of Japan, transporting pathogens including the avian influenza virus, which is known to infect fish and turtles.
The chemical contamination, either liquid or leached out of plastic and painted metal, will likely have the most immediate effects of harming human health and exterminating marine animals.
The toxic mess won’t stop at the shoreline. Many chemical compounds are volatile and can evaporate with water to form clouds, which will eventually precipitate as rainfall across Canada and the northern United States. The long-term threat extends far inland to the Rockies and beyond, affecting agriculture, rivers, reservoirs and, eventually, aquifers and well water.
Falsifying Oceanography
Soon after the Fukushima disaster, a spokesman for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) at its annual meeting in Vienna said that most of the radioactive water released from the devastated Fukushima No.1 nuclear plant was expected to disperse harmlessly in the Pacific Ocean.
Another expert in a BBC interview also suggested that nuclear sea-dumping is nothing to worry about because the “Pacific extension” of the Kuroshio Current would deposit the radiation into the middle of the ocean, where the heavy isotopes would sink into Davy Jones’s Locker.

At the time, this writer challenged this sort of unscientific hogwash since oceanographic studies have long indicated the Kuroshio (Black Stream) is the driving force for the North Pacific Current, which rapidly traverses the ocean to North America. The current is a relatively narrow band that acts like a conveyer belt, meaning radioactive materials will not disperse and settle but should remain concentrated
Soon thereafter, the IAEA backtracked, revising its earlier implausible scenario. In a newsletter, the atomic agency projected that cesium-137 might reach the shores of other countries in “several years or months.” To be accurate, the text should have been written “in several months rather than years.”
The Great Gyre
The network of currents comprise a larger hydrodynamic system known as North Pacific Gyre. Flotsam and jetsam from northeast Japan are moved along this path:
- The Liman or Oyashio (Parent Stream), a mineral-rich cold Arctic current that moves southwest from the Bering Strait past Kamchatka Peninsula and along Japan’s northeast region of Tohoku. The water used to cool the Fukushima meltdown is dumped into the passing Liman, which carries the radioactive wastewater southward toward Choshi Point, east of Tokyo..
- The rocky outcrop at Choshi forces the Liman to swerve eastward, where it collides with the tropical Kuroshio Current moving northward. The interaction of these opposing currents is complicated. The cold Liman is forced underneath the warm Black Tide, which explains why rockfish, abalone, sea urchins and other bottom dwellers have high readings of radioactivity.
An analysis lab in Fukushima has reported 15,000 becquerels per kg, or six times the legally allowable content. (The studies, like all in Japan, use the controversial method of taking average readings from entire samples, instead of measuring hot spots that can be 5 times higher.)
- Along the boundaries of the two currents, gigantic eddies are spun off. The mixing of nutrient-rich cold water with the warm current spurs the genesis of marine life, spawning algae and the larvae of fish and invertebrates. The waters off eastern Japan form the world’s richest fishery.
Of special importance in the food chain are squid, cuttlefish and others in the cephalopod family, which comprise the basic source of protein for fish.
- The merged Liman and Kuroshio become the North Pacific Current, pushing eastward to North America. Large predatory species, including tuna and salmon, feed here on the contaminated squid and on small fishes like herring and mackerel.
- When the North Pacific Current hits the continental shelf, it divides. One stream veers northward along the Canadian and Alaskan coast, and then swings counterclockwise toward the Bering Strait and Kamchatka Peninsula. These areas are the breeding grounds of seals, walruses, whales and sea otters. The region is also a major supplier of salmon and sea cucumbers for the Asian markets.
- The other stream turns clockwise to the south, becoming the California Current, the breeding waters of sea lions, pelicans and humpback whales. That southern stream eventually splits into two new currents: the Equatorial Pacific, which moves from Mexico to the Philippines, where it rejoins the Kuroshio; and the Peruvian, heading southward along the coast of South America and then westward into the South Pacific.
Mega-scale fluid dynamics show that the Fukushima nuclear disaster will soon contaminate most of the vital fisheries of the Pacific, which comprises half of the world’s sea surface.
Over the 30-year half-life of cesium, radioactive isotopes will be recycled a dozen times or more. Once into the Southern Sea surrounding Antarctica, the radioactive substances will move into the Atlantic and Indian Oceans.
If some evil genius, a modern-day Captain Nemo, were to plan the extermination of life on Earth, there could hardly be a better spot for hatching this nefarious plot than Fukushima.
http://nsnbc.me/2013/09/13/death-of-the-pacific-fukushima-debris-so...

April · 01-04-2014, 12:51 PM

What Is Happening To Alaska? Is Fukushima Responsible For The Mass Animal Deaths?

By Michael Snyder, on December 10th, 2013

Why are huge numbers of dead birds dropping dead and washing up along the coastlines of Alaska? It is being reported that many of the carcases of the dead birds are “broken open and bleeding”. The photo of some of these dead birds at the top of this article was originally posted by Alaska native David Akeya on Facebook. You can find more photos of these dead birds right here. And of course it isn’t just birds that are dying. As you will see below, something is causing mass death events among various populations of fish as well. In addition, it has been reported that large numbers of polar bears, seals and walruses in Alaska are being affected by hair loss and “oozing sores”. So precisely what is causing all of this? Could Fukushima be responsible? Authorities are claiming that all of this is being caused by “disease” or “harsh weather”, but are they actually telling us the truth? Evaluate the evidence that I have shared below and decide for yourself…
#1 Something is causing large numbers of dead birds to wash up on shores all over Alaska. The following is a report from Alaska Public Media about just one of these incidents…

Hundreds of dead birds washed up on the shores of St. Lawrence Island towards the end of November. And though the cause of the die off isn’t yet known, the quick response demonstrates a mounting capacity for dealing with unexpected environmental events in the region.

Scientists do not know why this is happening. Some of them are blaming “harsh weather”.
#2 Something is causing large numbers of seals and walruses to lose hair and develop “oozing sores”…

For example, while skin ulcers and other conditions — hair loss, lethargy, oozing sores, bloody mucous, congested lungs — are affecting seals and walruses, it’s not known if the two species are suffering from the same sickness. And although much studying has been done to determine whether it’s the result of a virus or radiation, and no tests have linked these origins to the illness, it’s not yet known what the root cause is. Toxins and environmental factors, like harmful algae blooms and thermal burns, are under consideration. As is whether allergy, hormone or nutritional problems might play a role.

Once again, scientists do not know why this is happening.
#3 Polar bears along the Alaska coastlines are also suffering from fur loss and open sores…

Wildlife experts are studying whether fur loss and open sores detected in nine polar bears in recent weeks is widespread and related to similar incidents among seals and walruses.
The bears were among 33 spotted near Barrow, Alaska, during routine survey work along the Arctic coastline. Tests showed they had “alopecia, or loss of fur, and other skin lesions,” the U.S. Geological Survey said in a statement.

Once again, scientists do not know why this is happening.
#4 The population of sockeye salmon along the coastlines of Alaska is at a “historic low”…

Aboriginal people in British Columbia who rely on Skeena River sockeye are facing some extremely difficult decisions as sockeye salmon returns plunge to historic lows.
Lake Babine Chief Wilf Adam was on his way to Smithers, B.C., on Monday for a discussion about whether to entirely shut down the food fishery on Lake Babine, something he said would be drastic and unprecedented – but may ultimately be necessary.

Authorities say that the number of sockeye salmon has dropped by more than 80 percent since last year…

Mel Kotyk, North Coast area director for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, said the department’s monitoring activities were finding one of the lowest runs in 50 years.
Only 453,000 sockeye are expected to swim along the Skeena this year, Kotyk said, compared to approximately 2.4 million last year, forcing all commercial and recreational Skeena sockeye fisheries to be closed.

Once again, scientists do not know why this is happening.
#5 Something is causing Pacific herring to bleed from their gills, bellies and eyeballs…

Independent fisheries scientist Alexandra Morton is raising concerns about a disease she says is spreading through Pacific herring causing fish to hemorrhage.
Ms. Morton has called on the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans to investigate, saying it could cause large-scale herring kills and infect wild salmon, which feed heavily on herring.
“I’ve been seeing herring with bleeding fins,” Ms. Morton said Monday. “Two days ago I did a beach seine on Malcolm Island [near Port McNeill on northern Vancouver Island] and I got approximately 100 of these little herring and they were not only bleeding from their fins, but their bellies, their chins, their eyeballs. These are very, very strong disease symptoms.”

Once again, scientists do not know why this is happening.
#6 Some residents of Alaska are absolutely convinced that Fukushima is to blame for the rapidly declining fish populations. For example, just check out the following excerpt from a recent editorial in one Alaskan newspaper…

We are concerned this hazardous material is hitching a ride on marine life and making its way to Alaska.
Currents of the world’s oceans are complex. But, generally speaking, two surface currents — one from the south, called the Kuroshio, and one from the north, called the Oyashio — meet just off the coast of Japan at about 40 degrees north latitude. The currents merge to form the North Pacific current and surge eastward. Fukushima lies at 37 degrees north latitude. Thousands of miles later, the currents hit an upwelling just off the western coast of the United States and split. One, the Alaska current, turns north up the coast toward British Columbia and Southeast Alaska. The other, the California current, turns south and heads down the western seaboard of the U.S.
The migration patterns of Pacific salmon should also be taken into consideration. In a nutshell, our salmon ride the Alaska current and follow its curve past Sitka, Yakutat, Kodiak and the Aleutian Islands. Most often, it’s the chinook, coho and sockeye salmon migration patterns that range farthest. Chum and pink salmon seem to stay closer to home. Regardless of how far out each salmon species ventures into the Pacific, each fish hitches a ride back to its home rivers and spawning grounds on the North Pacific current, the same one pulling the nuclear waste eastward.
We all know too much exposure to nuclear waste can cause cancer. And many understand that certain chemicals, such as cesium-137 and strontium-9, contained in said waste products can accumulate in fish by being deposited in bones and muscle permanently.
We are concerned our Alaska salmon are being slowly tainted with nuclear waste. We are worried about the impact this waste could have on our resources, and especially the people who consume them.

#7 Something also seems to be causing a substantial spike in the death rate for killer whales living off of the coast of British Columbia…

A Vancouver Aquarium researcher is sounding the alarm over “puzzling” changes he’s observed in the killer whale pods that live off the southern British Columbia coast.
Dr. Lance Barrett-Lennard says he fears changes in the ocean environment are prompting odd behaviour and an unusually high mortality rate.
Barrett-Lennard says the southern resident orca pod, which is found in the Salish Sea between Vancouver Island and the B.C. mainland, has lost seven matriarchs over the past two years, and he’s noticed a lack of vocalizations from the normally chatty mammals.

Once again, scientists do not know why this is happening.
These kinds of things are happening further south along the Pacific coast as well.
For example, the recent death of thousands of birds down in Oregon is absolutely baffling scientists…

Residents have reported groups ranging from 10 to 200 dead or dying barn and violet-green swallows in barns and around other structures where they perch. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife said the dieoffs appear to be worst close to rivers and standing water where the birds tend to gather.
The toll, estimated in the thousands, has stunned Fish and Wildlife specialists. “This type of mortality event is unprecedented and considered a rare and unusual event,” said Colin Gillin, wildlife veterinarian for the agency. “The effect on bird populations is unknown.”

Some scientists are blaming these deaths on “harsh weather”.
Do you buy that?
Clearly something very unusual is happening, and it should not be unreasonable to ask if Fukushima is at least partially responsible for all of this.
Without a doubt, the Pacific Ocean appears to be a much different place than it was before the Fukushima disaster. In fact, one very experienced Australian adventurer said that he felt as though “the ocean itself was dead” as he journeyed from Japan to San Francisco recently…

The next leg of the long voyage was from Osaka to San Francisco and for most of that trip the desolation was tinged with nauseous horror and a degree of fear.
“After we left Japan, it felt as if the ocean itself was dead,” Macfadyen said.
“We hardly saw any living things. We saw one whale, sort of rolling helplessly on the surface with what looked like a big tumour on its head. It was pretty sickening.
“I’ve done a lot of miles on the ocean in my life and I’m used to seeing turtles, dolphins, sharks and big flurries of feeding birds. But this time, for 3000 nautical miles there was nothing alive to be seen.”
In place of the missing life was garbage in astounding volumes.
“Part of it was the aftermath of the tsunami that hit Japan a couple of years ago. The wave came in over the land, picked up an unbelievable load of stuff and carried it out to sea. And it’s still out there, everywhere you look.”

What in the world would cause the Pacific Ocean to be “dead” like that?
Where did all the life go?
Hopefully we will start to get some answers to these questions.
For much more on all of this, please see my previous articles entitled “28 Signs That The West Coast Is Being Absolutely Fried With Nuclear...” and “Something Is Killing Life All Over The Pacific Ocean – Could It Be ...”
Meanwhile, radiation levels around Fukushima just continue to increase. The following is from a recent RT article…

Outdoor radiation levels have reached their highest at Japan’s Fukushima nuclear plant,warns the operator company.Radiation found in an area near a steel pipe that connects reactor buildings could kill an exposed person in 20 minutes,local media reported.
The plant’s operator and the utility responsible for the clean-up Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) detected record radiation levels on a duct which connects reactor buildings and the 120 meter tall ventilation pipe located outside on Friday. TEPCO measured radiation at eight locations around the pipe with the highest estimated at two locations – 25 Sieverts per hour and about 15 Sieverts per hour, the company said. This is the highest level ever detected outside the reactor buildings, according to local broadcaster NHK.

And every single day, another 400 tons of very highly radioactive water gets released into the Pacific Ocean. The total amount of radioactive material in the Pacific is constantly rising, and because many of these radioactive particles have a half-life of 30 years or longer, much of this material is going to be with us for a very, very long time.
This is turning out to be the greatest environmental disaster in modern history, and it is very far from over.
http://thetruthwins.com/archives/what-is-happening-to-alaska-is-fuk...

April · 01-04-2014, 12:51 PM