Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Sushi Safe From Japan Radiation as Ocean Makes Risk Negligible

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Godhumor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 09:11 AM
Original message
Sushi Safe From Japan Radiation as Ocean Makes Risk Negligible
Source: Bloomberg

The health risks of eating ocean fish caught near Japan are low because seawater is diluting the radiation from the damaged Fukushima Dai-Ichi plant, said Robert Peter Gale, who coordinated medical relief efforts following the nuclear accident at Chernobyl.

“Eating fish is not something to worry about,” said Gale, a visiting hematology professor at Imperial College London who was in Japan this week to speak to doctors responding to radiation threats. “No one could afford to consume enough sushi to get radiation damage.”

The observations by Gale, who in 1999 was asked by the Japanese government to help treat victims of the nuclear accident in Tokaimura, may help allay concerns that have prompted Taiwan, Singapore, the U.S. and Australia to restrict some imports of Japanese fish.

...

Contamination of seawater found near the 40-year-old plant has increased. Radioactive iodine rose to 4,385 times the regulated safety limit on March 30 from 2,572 times the previous day, Hidehiko Nishiyama, a spokesman for Japan’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency, said yesterday. No fishing is occurring nearby and the sea is dispersing the iodine so there is no health threat, he said.

Read more: http://noir.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601124&sid=a0l8V7Fy1GFQ



Article then goes on to quote WHO as pretty much saying, "Yeah, we're going to err on the side of caution, thank you very much."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
1. Mmm. Radioactive sushi and slick Gulf seafood
Edited on Fri Apr-01-11 09:20 AM by No Elephants
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 09:20 AM
Response to Original message
2. We'll all get to see how bio-accumulation works in this "experiment"...
...

The potential for maritime contamination occurs once airborne radioactive particles fall on the water and enter the maritime ecosystem. This happens when elements including iodine-131 and cesium-137 are absorbed by microscopic organisms such as phytoplanktons and zooplanktons, said Qian Pei-yuan, a professor of marine biology at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology.

“Any particle in the water falls into their feeding appendages or apparatus,” Qian said. “If other small fish eat them, then they will go through the food chain.”

Larger fish which live longer and survive by eating smaller fish have a higher chance of being contaminated. Sharks, porpoises and whales are particularly at risk, he said.

“The level of contamination of fish tissues depends on the level of contamination consumed and the exposure time of fish and how much they accumulate or expel contaminants,” Qian said.

...



We're in uncharted waters here....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rage for Order Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 09:28 AM
Response to Original message
3. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:rofl:

You folks go right ahead. If I want fish I'll stick with Mississippi farm-raised catfish for the time being, thank you very much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Godhumor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Like I said, I loved that a very skeptical WHO was quoted in the same article
It is eyebrow raising, for sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
walerosco Donating Member (449 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 09:36 AM
Response to Original message
5. I wonder
if 7 yrs later they will retract that statement. Just like the EPA declaration that the air outside ground zero was safe to breath. Just do not trust this finding, my intuition wouldn't let me
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mnemosyne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #5
18. I don't believe the EPA ever did retract their declaration re: ground zero air, did they?
Welcome to DU, walerosco! Mind-boggling isn't it, the crap they try to 'feed' us?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zoeisright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 09:40 AM
Response to Original message
6. That was the same philosophy that made people site landfills by rivers and streams.
The erroneous thought that the water would "dilute" the pollution.

WRONG.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L0oniX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 09:45 AM
Response to Original message
7. Trade ya for some Gulf of Mexico sea food.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. I'll take some Pacific caught fish over anything from the Gulf any time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NV Whino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 09:58 AM
Response to Original message
8. Is everyone bookmarking this for future reference?
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 10:02 AM
Response to Original message
10. The propaganda they are feeding the people is as radioactive
as everything else.

Lie to the people until it is too late for them to do anything about it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mnemosyne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #10
19. You got it exactly, lib. "Until it is too late"... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nc4bo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 10:02 AM
Response to Original message
11. Dang. All the really good pointy comments have already been stated.
Today's Special: Glow fish and oil-tossed shrimp salad?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mnemosyne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #11
20. Happens to me all the time, always too late... Good one though, "glow fish"! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marblehead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 10:05 AM
Response to Original message
12. This is good for some
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidthegnome Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
13. Well, I'm convinced!
No.. not really. This strikes me as similar to our dear Ann telling us radiation is good for you. Uh huh. I don't buy it.

Do people really think we're stupid? Radioactive iodine is good for you! Nah, it won't hurt or contaminate those fish! But if it does... we can't be held responsible for what we had to say, you know, because we're only saying what we were paid to say... I mean told to say, I mean, we're experts, you can trust us.

Right, the sea will disperse it. Repeat after me: There is no health risk here. There is no health risk here. There is no health risk here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Godhumor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Oh yeah, it is a great article. Was actually hoping Bloomberg was playing a very subtle April Fool's
joke.

Still love the WHO response.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ticonderoga Donating Member (489 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 10:37 AM
Response to Original message
15. None
Atomic Sushi Yum Yum
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mnemosyne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 10:41 AM
Response to Original message
16. April Fools! Oh wait, no? Seriously?
Edited on Fri Apr-01-11 10:45 AM by Mnemosyne
:rofl::cry::rofl::cry::rofl::cry::rofl::cry::rofl::cry::rofl::cry::cry::cry:

It will get much deeper than that before they are done. Would they actually have the cajones to try to convince us it makes us healthier? It would not surprise me in the least if they did. :puke:

Thanks for the 'laugh', Godhumor!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
17. Seawater dilutes radiation?
Is this a joke? Like there's no more oil in the Gulf?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thelordofhell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 11:16 AM
Response to Original message
21. Maybe all that Mercury in fish kills radiation
:nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
They_Live Donating Member (244 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #21
24. Yeah, that's the ticket
mercury is all shiny, see, so the radiation just bounces off. Sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Journeyman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 11:27 AM
Response to Original message
22. Let's all chant in unison: "The solution to pollution is dilution" . . .
say it loud enough, say it long enough, say it with enough conviction . . . it may not prove true but it will soothe the easily mollified . . .

Like Rudyard Kipling's Bandar-log monkey tribe, let us gather together and loudly chant, "We all say so, so it must be true!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suffragette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 11:31 AM
Response to Original message
23. How does seawater dilute radiation inside the fish?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hugabear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 12:05 PM
Response to Original message
25. Ann Coulter sez that radiation is good for us
So nothing to worry about
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skoalyman Donating Member (751 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
26. wonder if it last longer then glow sticks
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-01-11 06:37 PM
Response to Original message
27. Don't forget the many seaweed farms that dot the coast whose products become sushi/sashimi wrappings
Edited on Fri Apr-01-11 07:01 PM by ClarkUSA
Wouldn't plant matter growing in such levels of radioactivity tend to concentrate radiation in its cell matter as it grows?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 05:08 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC