Radiation fallout from Japan affects food safety across North America

Dr. Robert J. Gilbert Ph.D.

“Dr. Robert J. Gilbert has a multi-faceted background in both spiritual and scientific studies. He is a former U.S. Marine Corps Instructor in Nuclear-Biological-Chemical Warfare Survival; since leaving the service in 1985 he has conducted independent research into the Geometric basis of modern science and new technologies…..” Read more

Clearly, in light of his background, Robert Gilbert is someone worth listening to on the subject of radiation dangers from the recent nuclear disaster in Japan. Here’s an excerpt from a page on his Vesica.org website, dealing with the subject:

“AREAS WHOSE FOOD PRODUCTS MAY NOW CARRY RADIOACTIVE FALLOUT

The Entirety of the Northern Hemisphere around the world is affected by fallout, as well as the Pacific Ocean.

Most Serious:  Japan, Pacific Ocean, and Pacific Rim States

Most Contaminated food areas of North America (based on fallout wind spread patterns charted by European scientific research agencies) in order of likely intensity of contamination, starting with the most contaminated:

  • Entire Pacific Coast (note that much of the produce in North America comes from this region, especially California)
  • Northern U.S. States close to Canada, and Canadian areas close to the U.S. (including Toronto etc.)
  • Eastern States
  • Central States of the U.S., and Far Northern areas of Canada

SAFEST AREAS OF ORIGIN FOR FOOD PRODUCTS

The majority of contamination is in the northern hemisphere and the Pacific Ocean region.  Most of the Southern Hemisphere has little to no fallout (the exception is the Southern Hemisphere in the Pacific; Australia for example is finding radioactive fish in the ocean, so although they may not get much atmospheric fallout they are affected by the massive contamination of the Pacific Ocean.)

Also note that radioactive contamination is being found on non-food products being imported from Japan.

Safest Areas of Origin for food products:
Central America (avoid items from the Pacific Coast area of Mexico)
South America
Africa

Europe is also far less contaminated that North America, although it is also experiencing significant fallout; so it is a better source for products than North America, however not as good as Southern Hemisphere sources.  (However some South American produce may contain high levels of pesticides not allowed to be used in the U.S. or Canada.)

ITEMS OF SPECIAL CONCERN FROM AFFECTED AREAS

Most affected:

All Ocean-Derived Products from the Pacific Ocean: the Fukushima accident dumped millions of times the normal background levels of radiation into the Pacific, where it is affecting the entire ocean (most toxic near Japan and bordering areas, but now reaching to the US West Coast: debris from the Tsunami in Japan is also expected to start washing up on the West Coast in the near future.)  There are already reports of Pacific Fish showing radioactive contamination.
This indicates a need to be cautious regarding:
All Pacific Ocean Fish
Sea Salt or Ocean Minerals derived from the Pacific
All Pacific Seaweed and Sea Vegetables (order Atlantic Ocean seaweed at www.theseaweedman.com )

Milk and all Dairy Products (butter, cheese etc.) from all animals: Cows, Goats, and Sheep (Dairy products have the most intense immediate absorption of radiation from fallout). Radioactive contamination of milk has been found throughout the United States, especially on the West Coast.

Any plant with a large surface area exposed to the air while growing:  The most intense radiation absorption in plants is through rain falling directly on the leaves  of the plant, where it is directly absorbed.  Rainwater absorbed through the earth into the plant is already of much lower radiation intensity due to the filtering affect of the soil.

All broad leaf plants and plants with large surface areas grown in the open air (rather than in greenhouses) are the most contaminated, for instance Salad Greens, Spinach, Cabbage etc.  Contaminated crops in California (carrying radioactive iodine and cesium) have already been confirmed by UC Berkeley.

[Carrots and other root vegetables are less contaminated due to growing underground.]

Water from Rainwater or Open Lake type catchments: instead drink bottled water, or water from underground wells or other underground sources (radiation is greatly reduced when the particles have to travel through the ground.)

PREGNANT (OR BREASTFEEDING) WOMEN AND YOUNG CHILDREN SHOULD ESPECIALLY BE CAREFUL REGARDING THESE ITEMS COMING FROM FALLOUT AFFECTED AREAS…”

Read more on the Vesica website.

Bolding was added for emphasis. 

Related material:

The speaker in the video below, Dr Caldicott, has received many awards for her work, including 21 honorary doctoral degrees, and she was personally nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize by Linus Pauling. The Smithsonian Institute has named Dr Caldicott as one of the most influential women of the 20th Century. She’s definitely a whistle-blower worth listening to:

Addendum, May 26, 2011:

In response to a comment that was posted below today, I did a Google search on “Japan Safety” on the 26th of May and found that this post on the Bovine comes up as the second search result out of 477,000,000,  just after the L.A. Times and just ahead of Bloomberg. See below:

Detail of a frame grab from Google May 26, 2011

Interesting. And we’re not using any SEO tricks or black magic to pull this off.

About these ads

57 Comments

Filed under News

57 responses to “Radiation fallout from Japan affects food safety across North America

  1. Pingback: Radiation fallout from Japan affects food safety across North America! « bubbabutt

  2. Pingback: Radiation Fallout From Japan Affects Food Safety Across North America :

  3. thebovine

    Interesting that this story has been picked by Alex Jones’ Infowars.com website

    • AJ

      Hello “the bovine”:

      Alex Jones, started covering the Japan earthquake on March 11, the day of the earthquake and tsunami. Alex Jones was covering the story when those 3 reactors melted down on March 13-14th. He has since dropped it for the most part to cover more pressing National issues. I quit coming to this site around March 20th, and deleted it off of my favorites. Why? Because I tried numerous times to wake people up on this site to what was happening. Even sent Michael an email directly to check it out. I just now decided to check in because I am now all filled up with what is happening.

      Become informed we have bigger problems now than Fukushima, and Fukushima is a big problem for anyone living in the Northern Hemisphere!

      checkout:

      http://crisisjones.wordpress.com/

      http://aircrap.org/

      http://www.youtube.com/user/dutchsinse

      http://news.lucaswhitefieldhixson.com/

      http://www.lawlessamerica.com/

      And, yeh, by all means keep track of what Alex is up to.

    • AJ

      Hello “the bovine”:

      Alex Jones, started covering the Japan earthquake on March 11, the day of the earthquake and tsunami. Alex Jones was covering the story when those 3 reactors melted down on March 13-14th. He has since dropped it for the most part to cover more pressing National issues. I quit coming to this site around March 20th, and deleted it off of my favorites. Why? Because I tried numerous times to wake people up on this site to what was happening. Even sent Michael an email directly to check it out. I just now decided to check in because I am now all filled up with what is happening.

      Become informed we have bigger problems now than Fukushima, and Fukushima is a big problem for anyone living in the Northern Hemisphere!

      checkout (spaces have been added in the links to bypass moderation):
      http: // crisisjones. wordpress. com/
      http: // aircrap. org/
      http: //www. youtube. com/ user/ dutchsinse
      http: //news. lucaswhitefieldhixson. com/
      http: //www. lawlessamerica. com/

      And, yeh, by all means keep track of what Alex is up to.
      Good Day

  4. Pingback: Radiation fallout from Japan affects food safety across North America | INFOTROOPS - infowars

  5. Sad that those of us who produce grass-fed raw milk are the ones to suffer the most.

    We have a radiation fallout plan that includes keeping our goats indoors and feeding them last summer’s hay — while it lasts. We will put this plan into place when our own radiation monitoring shows an increase. But so far, no statistically significant deviations from normal have been observed.

    • Esther Cook

      Radiation is site specific because it comes down with rain. Therefore you should sell your jproducts with a statement to the effect that your farm monitors radiation levels and will act to keep your milk contaminant-free. That is very valuable information.

    • Yes that is very sad. I read somewhere that folks in Cherynobl were using bentonite for their animals to help remove some of the radiation. Thanks so much to the Bovine for bringing us this very important info.

  6. Pingback: End Times Are Here « Morning Nightly News

  7. Pingback: Radiation fallout from Japan affects food safety across North America | ClipsNewsNetwork

  8. Pingback: Radiation Fallout From Japan Affects Food Safety Across North America | Conscious Life News

  9. Pingback: Radiation Fallout From Japan Affects Food Safety Across North America | Mountain Republic

  10. thebovine

    Just counting the pingbacks (in the comments, above), it seems that seven other websites have now picked up this story. Good information travels fast along the internets!

  11. Critical Geek

    Why, oh why, oh why do journalists consistently confuse RADIATION with RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS? Absorbing radiation from a radioactive source has no more ongoing effect than absorbing heat from cooking has an ongoing effect. It definitely affects the material being being fried, but that fried material doesn’t cause further effects on things that eat it. It’s the radioactive cesium and iodine, the materials, that are the issue, and while this article mentions them, in conflates their appearance with the radiation effects that they cause. It’s the difference between eating barbequed chicken, and the glowing coal that barbequed the chicken. Articles about nuclear safety that don’t explicitly differentiate between the two, no matter how vaunted the source, are just fearmongering.

    • @Critical Geek, I re-read the article and the comments, and I didn’t see the confusion between radioactivity and radioactive contamination.

      Yea, there may have been a slip or two (“Dairy products have the most intense immediate absorption of radiation from fallout…”), but it appears to me that the article is exclusively about radioactive contamination, in that radioactive materials are taken up by the body, causing a continuous radiation dose to nearby tissues.

      In general, I agree with you, especially when nuclear proponents try to dupe people into thinking radioactive contamination is somehow equivalent to some number of jet flights, but why the diatribe here, in an article that is concerned about contamination and fallout?

  12. Pingback: Some Potentially Good News | Seacoast Sense

  13. yirgach

    The problem with this article is that there is no mention of the DEGREE of contamination. How serious is it? Is the “Raidation Contamination” dose more than 250 mSv? Do you even know what a mSv is?

    This is just awful reporting.

    • yirgagh, you don’t seem to understand what you’re talking about.

      “250mSv” would be an absorbed single dose of radiation, not an ingested amount of radioactive contamination. Please read Critical Geek’s complaint above, as unlike the article, you seem to be confusing “radiation” with “contamination.”

      250 millisieverts is the maximum cumulative annual dose allowed in industry. It is based upon the affects of acute radiation sickness. One can receive 250 millisieverts in a short period, and one’s body may be able to repair itself.

      However, with ingested radioactive contamination, nearby tissue is continuously bombarded with alpha or beta radiation over long periods of time. These tissues do not get a break to repair themselves. No less than the US National Cancer Institute recognizes that ingested continuous absorbed doses in the microsievert range can increase risk of cancer.

  14. Pingback: Radiation fallout from Japan affects food safety across North America « Vermont For Evolution

  15. Pingback: Reality Zone Unfiltered News 2011 April 16-22

  16. Pingback: FALLOUT: What Food/Water And From Where Are OK To Eat | actionandresistance

  17. bill

    according to radiationnetwork.com our radiation levels don’t look too bad yet

    • Heidi

      correct me if I’m wrong but don’t those geiger counters just count radiation and not contamination? This article is only about contamination from fallout, which you see measured when someone filters air or water over a specific amount of time and goes into a lab setting with the filter where they use various kinds of specialized equipment to measure which radioactive isotopes are present on the filter. I’m am not sure but I don’t think geiger counters in general pick up this kind of contamination that the author is referring to.

      • Heidi, that’s pretty accurate.

        A geiger counter can detect contamination if it is a considerable amount. I alternate indoor readings with “wet rag” readings from outside when it rains.

        Filtering works for largish particles in suspension, which is unlikely to be the case for stuff coming across the Pacific. It does not work for things that are in solution, in other words, dissolved like salt. For those, you need to precipitate the radioisotope out of solution.

        It gets pretty complicated to measure small amounts, or to selectively measure specific isotopes. But a geiger counter will detect gross contamination, and is considerably better than nothing, once you learn how to use it.

    • AJ

      You have been lied to, Bill.

      • Please explain, I too have been watching blackcat and radiationnetwork, without worrying terribly, until just recently. It doesn’t make sense that nothing is being picked up.

      • @Joanne Miller (why can’t I reply directly?)

        Again, the difference between radiation and radioactive contamination rears its ugly head.

        GM counters, such as used in the monitoring networks, measure radiation in a gross manner. They do not discriminate between types of radiation, nor between isotopes. They do not accumulate radioactive contamination, like a sampler, which draws air through a filter over a long period of time, and then measures the radiation coming from the filter.

        It is important to note that radioactive contamination below the measuring threshold of inexpensive (meaning less than $10,000) detectors can be harmful, as different organs bioaccumulate certain radioisotopes.

        Public health authorities are beginning to take notice. Yesterday, the government of BC announced that infant deaths for the first six months of 2011 are already 38% higher than they were for all of 2010, higher than any year since 1986, when (co-incidentally?) Chernobyl exploded. They call it a mystery, and blame it on “poor parenting practices,” with no mention of Fukushima. Well, duh!

        Similarly, Dr. Sherman has found a 35% increase in infant deaths in several western cities. Of course, the nuclear apologists have been all over that with denials, rebuttals, and outright personal attacks.

        You want to know what’s happening? Look at infant death statistics, not radiation monitoring networks! Like the “canary in the coal mine,” biological detectors are always more sensitive than human engineered ones.

  18. For those who would like a little more data, please see: http://www.thelivingwellmoms.com/2011/04/radiation-in-milk-radioactive-iodine-in.html (Radiation in the Milk, Radioactive Iodine in the Air – What are the Risks? )
    I discuss dose levels and give links to real time data on the West Coast. I agree there is cause for concern, but let’s keep the numbers in perspective.

  19. DIANE

    WHAT CAN WE DO, TO HELP OURSELF THE AIR WILL BE POLUTED, aswell our food. this is so critical and yet most people dont even know about it!!!
    word need to get out

    • AJ

      Dianne, go to > http: // www. naturalnews. com/
      Search through the archives Mike Adams put out excellent articles on defending against nuclear radiation within days of the explosions.

      I have been applying topical iodine for years, not knowing that it is also a prime defense against radioactive iodine. I am now applying it about every 4 days via a 2 inch spot under my bicep. If it remains 48 hours later you have sufficient iodine in your system to regect radioactive iodine, to also prevent cancer, and to balance hormonal production.

  20. tony

    Don’t assume that the dose of radiation you are getting from Japan is harmful e.g. 1 unit more on to of 100 per day is nothing. Also there is increasing evidence that a small amount of radiation is good. Yes you read right. Good for you. I am not saying that we should encourage human additions to radiation background but I you think about it its normal for humans to be exposed to more radiation that they currently. Before modeern life we were outdorrs more often and exposed to teh soil more which naturally has more radiation. A little bit of stress on plants and animals induces tolerance responses that are likely to ward off germs, other stresses. Plants pre exposed to smaller amounts of insects or drought survieve between when more isnects or drought arrive. So don’t overreact to this. Radon coming into homes and cigarette smoke and the number one sources of radiation and cancer. Coal fired plants produce more radiation per year than even the japanese disaster. Coal has radioactivity in it and its released when it is burnt.

    • Sorry, Tony, but this is complete bull.

      The US National Cancer Institute recognizes the “linear, no-threshold” (LNT) model of epidemiological impacts of ionizing radiation — in other words, any amount is harmful.

      The “radiation hormesis” theory that “some radiation is good for you” was cooked up by the nuclear industry, and except for a few industry-paid scientists, is universally discredited.

      Also totally false is that “coal fired plants produce more radiation per year than even the japanese disaster.” If you have any evidence to the contrary, please post a link.

      Yes, don’t overreact. But also, don’t swallow the nuclear industry line that this stuff is harmless in certain quantities. After all, they’re the ones who told us it was going to be “too cheap to meter.” And now Japan will have to take over TEPCO because they can’t afford to clean up their own mess. Too cheap to meter, indeed!

      • Al

        We are all safe until it happens in your back yard, use coal,crude , after all are we going to live for ever? Do you remember when our gov was using islands in the Pacific to test all those nukes? have a nice day and stop give yourself problems.

  21. thebovine

    Map of real-time radiation levels across the U.S.: http://www.radiationnetwork.com/

  22. MiMiii

    I don’t see why this article doesn’t mention the AMOUNT of radiation that was emitted… if there really were that much radiation given out that it would still be dangerous to people in the pacific rim states (after it crosses the pacific ocean and goes under the weather) then Tokyo, Yokohama and the nearby cities of Japan would have all been doomed now. I think the real danger of this Fukushima incident is the unstability of the reactors and what could potentially happen to them, rather than the radiation that is being emitted at the present time. Mainichi newspaper of Japan reports that outside the evacuation zone, there will be some cities and towns nearby (within 100km) that will be exposed to more than 10 msv of radiation by March of next year (the link to this story is below if you can read Japanese…) A normal human is exposed to 1 msv a year, so this will be more than 10 times that. However, the level of radiation that is considered to cause dangerous effects on your body is at 100 msv, and the limit of radiation exposure on people working with radioactive matter is 50 msv.
    In places such as Tokyo (definitely more than 100km away from the powerplant), the radiation level is going to be even lower. So naturally, there should not be a substantial amount of dangerous radiation in North America… though we do have a lot of coal, and I don’t know if burning coal produces more radiation than the Fukushima disaster, it does produce 100 times more radiation than a nuclear plant producing the same amount of energy —> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste see for more info. Anycase, I really do hope that the Fukushima reactors will cool down and stabilize very soon because that really is dangerous, and you guys should try reading stories about the disaster from the Japanese media if possible, since western media does alot of selective coverage. I’m half Japanese and my father and family lives in Japan (Tokyo to be specific) and they’re all doing fine, life goes on for people there and everything isn’t in chaos like some news shows may make it seem. We who live in America should be more concerned with radiation from coal and radon that seeps into our houses rather than radiation (VERY little of it) coming here.

    http://mainichi.jp/select/weathernews/20110311/nuclear/news/20110427k0000m040129000c.html

  23. MiMiii, the problem is that the radiation being emitted is not evenly dispersed. It stays in a cloud, travels on the wind, and then it is brought down in rain in amounts that can cause a statistically significant amount of additional cancer.

    “… there will be some cities and towns nearby (within 100km) that will be exposed to more than 10 msv of radiation by March of next year (the link to this story is below if you can read Japanese…) A normal human is exposed to 1 msv a year, so this will be more than 10 times that. However, the level of radiation that is considered to cause dangerous effects on your body is at 100 msv, and the limit of radiation exposure on people working with radioactive matter is 50 msv.

    Once again, the confusion between “radiation” and “radioactive contamination.”

    If you get “dosed” and then the source goes away, your body begins to repair itself. This is most often gamma radiation, which has the least impact on living tissue.

    On the other hand, if you ingest iodine-131, it goes into your thyroid and stays in one spot, continuously bombarding a very localized area with highly destructive beta particles that break apart DNA and other molecules and that create free radicals.

    If you were a child during nuclear weapons testing, the US National Cancer Institute can tell you what your increased risk of thyroid cancer is, based upon where you lived and how much milk you drank. This is from a very small amount of I-131!

    The US NCI and all other government agencies use the “linear, no-threshold” (LNT) risk assessment. In other words, there is no “safe” dose, and doubling your normal background radiation level doubles your risk of health effects.

  24. thebovine

    Wondering what all those numbers really mean? Check out this radiation dose chart: http://xkcd.com/radiation/

    • “Wondering what all those numbers really mean?”

      Wait, wait, WAIT! Once again, the confusion between “radiation” and “radioactive contamination” rears its ugly head!

      This chart is fine for what it tells you, but it is useless for what it doesn’t tell you!

      Charts like this lead to the oft-repeated fallacy that getting iodine-131 in your milk is the equivalent of eating so many bananas, or taking so many jet flights, or having granite counter tops. This is comparing two completely different things!

      An “absorbed dose,” as measured by the SI unit “Sievert,” is an amount of radiation per unit of mass. The same amount of radiation produces twice the absorbed dose in a 75 pound child as it does in a 150 pound adult.

      Contamination is quite different. I-131 lodges in the thyroid, and gives a continuous low-level dose to the tissues immediately surrounding it. This can have a much greater impact than such charts indicate.

      Then there’s the problem of bioaccumulation. I-131 bioaccumulates in milk. Strontium-90 behaves like calcium, and bioaccumulates in vegetation.

      Contamination is the problem, not so much radiation.

      “24 hour continuous exposure to 1,200 CPM is lowest annual dose that can cause cancer.”

      This is totally misleading, again confusing “radiation” with “radioactive contamination.”

      The US National Cancer Institute and all other reputable organizations follow the “linear, no-threshold” (LNT) model of radiological health impact. If you double even a very tiny dose, your risk is also doubled — although still very tiny.

      This means there is no “safe” level, there are only differing levels of risk.

      Once you understand that, it is easy to say, “Well, the risk is higher, but it is still tiny.” The problem with that is build-up. Three Mile Island here, Chernobyl there, Fukushima over there, and pretty soon, the total we’re getting inches up and up. Not even half the caesium-137 from Chernobyl has gone away yet, and we’re now adding Cs-137 from Fukushima!

      So yes, don’t panic. But no, this isn’t something to get complacent about because some chart or website says certain levels are “safe.”

  25. thebovine

    From a forum post on Godlike Productions:

    Every article I read is confusing, because they list various scenarios with different measurments:

    CPM,Microsievert,Millisievert,Sievert all in the same story.

    I hope this makes it easier for some of you. Please correct my numbers if they are wrong.

    24 hour continuous exposure to 1,200 CPM is lowest annual dose that can cause cancer.

    100 CPM = 1 MICROSIEVERT PER HOUR
    100 CPM = 8,760 MICROSIEVERTS PER YEAR
    1,200CPM = 12 MICROSIEVERTS PER HOUR
    1,200CPM = 105,120 MICROSIEVERTS PER YEAR

    100,000 MICROSIEVERT = LOWEST ANNUAL CANCER DOSE
    100 MILLISIEVERT = LOWEST ANNUAL CANCER DOSE

    50,000 MICROSIEVERT = MAX ANNUAL DOSE FOR RADIATION WORKER
    50 MILLISIEVERT = MAX ANNUAL DOSE FOR RADIATION WORKER

    1,000,000 MICROSIEVERT = 1 SIEVERT

    1,000 MILLISIEVERT = 1 SIEVERT

    1,000 MICROSIEVERT = 1 MILLISIEVERT

    100,000 MICROSIEVERT = 100 MILLISIEVERT

    • If you are are a “baby boomer” (or thereabouts), the US National Cancer Institute will tell you how much your risk of thyroid cancer has increased, due to nuclear weapons testing.

      That web page will ask you questions about where you lived, how much milk you drank, and what sort of milk (human, cow, goat, etc.) to determine how much I-131 you incorporated into your thyroid.

      Living in southeast Michigan at the time and drinking mostly our own goat milk, I find my risk has almost doubled, from 1.2 per thousand to 2.1 per thousand.

      This is based upon a very tiny amount of I-131! And there is 1,800 tonnes of nuclear fuel at risk at Fukushima — roughly 90 times as much as all the nuclear weapons that were exploded in the ’50’s and ’60’s.

      Of course, it’s impossible to accurately compare nuclear explosions with melting nuclear fuel, but the point is, we must not be complacent! There is real potential for a long-term, slow-motion epidemic here.

  26. al

    How dangerous are non food products when imported from Japan? I realise this is probably like asking, ‘how long is a piece of string’. Thanks for the debate.

    • I am not concerned about non-food products from Japan.

      The biggest risk is from ingesting or inhaling radioactive contamination, rather than getting a dose of radiation from external sources.

      Certainly, almost all Japanese consumer goods are manufactured indoors, and would have little opportunity for incorporating radioactive contamination. And even if they did, the impact would probably be similar to having granite counter-tops, which are measurably radioactive!

      Always keep in mind the huge difference between radiation and radioactive contamination. You need only be concerned with radiation if you live near a nuclear plant or work at one. But ingesting or inhaling radioactive contamination is a completely different sort of risk level.

      • AL

        Thanks for the info.
        There is much conflicting advice out there it can be hard to know what to believe. I think yours appears to be better than most though.

  27. AL

    p.s I am a different AL to the previous debater. Sorry no attempt to deceive.

  28. Julian

    This article appears near the top of search engine results for “Japan safety.” With such exposure comes responsibility to report in a balanced and accurate manner.

    The Dr. Robert J. Gilbert article and web site are not consistent with mainstream science, nor with reporting from a variety of sources including the International Atomic Energy Agency (www.iaea.org).

    I live in Japan, approximately 600km from the Fukushima nuclear plant. Borrowing Jan’s words “so far, no statistically significant deviations from normal [radiation] have been observed”.

    Our area is based on agriculture (including dairy!) and tourist industries. Both industries have bit hit severely. Sadly this is largely due to a fear of radiation when in actual fact there is no elevation in radiation levels.

    Let’s not further adversely effect a country and its people as they recover from this natural disaster. Healthy debate is great, but I urge keeping things in balanced perspective.

    • thebovine

      You’re welcome to have your say here in the comments, Julian. But as you’ve maybe noticed from some of our other posts, we’re not about presenting the mainstream science perspective.

      Thanks for pointing out where we are in the search results. I wasn’t aware of that.

      • Julian

        Open debate is essential, and you’ve got a great forum for it.

        Rather than ‘mainstream’ I should really have said ‘empirical’. Measurement (including that performed by some posters) refutes statements in the article such as: “The Entirety of the Northern Hemisphere around the world is affected by fallout, as well as the Pacific Ocean.”

        Aside from contradicting measurement, such comments create fear and have a harmful effect on Japanese food and tourism industries. Unfortunately this having a tangible negative effect on people in Japan.

        Lots of wisdom in subsequent posts. As one poster says; “let’s keep the numbers in perspective”. One can only hope readers of this page make it down past the article, and reach some more balanced views.

  29. Pingback: Like I said, we’ve been sending Alex Jones Traffic « The Crisis Jones Report

  30. Pingback: Like I said, we’ve been sending Alex Jones Traffic « The Crisis Jones Report

  31. thebovine

    Magnesium and soil mineralization and their effect on radiation contamination of plants and agriculture: http://thebovine.wordpress.com/2011/05/31/magnesium-and-radiation-protection/

  32. Pingback: Radiation spreading around the world from Japan | THINK BEYOND

  33. hey al gore, ipcc, and legititmate greenies! Where are you at on this one?

  34. Pingback: Egy Freight

  35. Pingback: Detox Radiation & More with Bentonite Clay :: Hella Delicious

  36. Pingback: Fukushima Nuclear Disaster Exposed | Trade Out This Hate with Love

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s