This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
“Absolutely Every One” – 15 Out of 15 – Bluefin Tuna Tested In California Waters Contaminated with Fukushima Radiation
We noted more than a year ago:
The ocean currents head from Japan to the West Coast of the U.S.
***
Of course, fish don’t necessarily stay still, either. For example, the Telegraph notes that scientists tagged a bluefin tuna and found that it crossed between Japan and the West Coast three times in 600 days:
That might be extreme, but the point is that fish exposed to radiation somewhere out in the ocean might end up in U.S. waters.
And see this.
CNN reports today:
Low levels of radioactive cesium from Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident turned up in fish caught off California in 2011, researchers reported Monday.
The bluefin spawn off Japan, and many migrate across the Pacific Ocean. Tissue samples taken from 15 bluefin caught in August, five months after the meltdowns at Fukushima Daiichi, all contained reactor byproducts cesium-134 and cesium-137 at levels that produced radiation about 3% higher than natural background sources
The Wall Street Journal quotes the studies’ authors:
“The tuna packaged it up and brought it across the world’s largest ocean,” said marine ecologist Daniel Madigan at Stanford University, who led the study team. “We were definitely surprised to see it at all and even more surprised to see it in every one we measured.”
***
“We found that absolutely every one of them had comparable concentrations of cesium-134 and cesium-137,” said marine biologist Nicholas Fisher at Stony Brook University in New York state, who was part of the study group.
The bad news is that is is only going to get worse.
As Reuters points out:
Unlike some other compounds, radioactive cesium does not quickly sink to the sea bottom but remains dispersed in the water column, from the surface to the ocean floor.
Fish can swim right through it, ingesting it through their gills, by taking in seawater or by eating organisms that have already taken it in ….
As CNN notes:
Neither [of the scientists who tested the fish] thought they were likely to find cesium at all, they said. And since the fish tested were born about a year before the disaster, “This year’s fish are going to be really interesting,” Madigan said.
“There were fish born around the time of the accident, and those are the ones showing up in California right now,” he said. “Those have been, for the most part, swimming around in those contaminated waters their whole lives.”
In other words, the 15 fish tested were only exposed the radiation for a short time. But bluefin arriving in California now will have been exposed to the Fukushima radiation for much longer.
As KGTV San Diego explains:
The real test of how radioactivity affects tuna populations comes this summer when researchers planned to repeat the study with a larger number of samples. Bluefin tuna that journeyed last year were exposed to radiation for about a month. The upcoming travelers have been swimming in radioactive waters for a longer period. How this will affect concentrations of contamination remains to be seen.
One of the studies’ authors told the BBC:
The fish that will be arriving around now, and in the coming months, to California waters may be carrying considerably more radioactivity and if so they may possibly be a public health hazard.
Japanese and U.S. officials – of course – are pretending that the amount of radiation found in the bluefin is safe. But the overwhelming scientific consensus is that there is no safe level of radiation … and radiation consumed and taken into the body is much more dangerous than background radiation.
»
- advertisements -
Hey Winston, I got some large Brazil nuts you can munch on, seeing as how they are safe to eat and all.
Yeah sure.. just like they originally said that mercury in fish was "nothing", exposure to DDT was "nothing", etc.
The "other substances contain isotopes, so you can't get away from them" is also a whitewash. There are different kinds and combinations of isotopes that exist in nature from various sources and all of them pose varying levels of danger to humans. Some cite isotopes released from nuclear weapons tests, but the most harmful of the isotopes from these reactions actually are a lot less dangerous to humans because the more lethal alpha emitters from nuclear weapons explosions have SIGNIFICANTLY shorter half life than do the released isotopes from an unmoderated nuclear reactor.
The FACT is that NO amount of alpha emitting radiation is safe for human consumption. It might be true that of, say, 100 isotopes ingested, the human body's immune system might be able to destroy the precancerous effects of 99 of them... but, even this is a crap shoot. It only takes ONE isotope, ingested, and for it to somehow make its way to a sensitive tissue and successfully mutate the surrounding tissue for someone to come down with full blown cancer.
Lastly, nobody has yet mentioned the "P" word. Plutonium. A few ounces of this, aerosolized and scattered widely throughout the world, could wipe out our entire species. One of the Fukushima reactors was burning plutonium-laden MOX fuel and there were tons of spent MOX fuel being stored at the complex. God only knows how much of this was blown into the skies, but the fact that its been detected in areas kilometers away from the plant site indicates that at least a portion of it HAS been released. How much of it might be draining into the ocean in the form of coolant runoff, into the ocean, and into the food chain is anybody's guess.
The danger is not the readings RIGHT NOW that these "scientists" have cited, the danger is what the readings will be in FUTURE years as already released isotopes further permeate the bio system, bio accumulate up the food chain, and end up on our plates.
"We have no facts let alone data." THAT is what is worrying. "Glad to hear all those denials from the folks in the know"...know what i mean?
You want something valid to worry about? Worry about the thousands of chemical substances you inhale and eat in quantities vastly greater than you'd consume or breath in your natural environment, the wilderness. Unlike radiation which has been around for the entire evolutionary history of man and therefore has had adaptive mechanisms evolve to handle it or possibly even benefit from small amounts of it (hormesis), many of those chemicals you're ingesting or breathing are not found in the natural environment or found in the quantity you breath or consume, so the human body has not had the tens of thousands of years needed to adapt to them or defend itself from them.
So, take a chill pill and stop hyping things that are nothing. If you're so concerned about minuscule levels of radioactivity then be damned sure to never take an airline flight anywhere, vacation in the mountains or eat any number of foods that are naturally radioactive. And when you drive through very high radon zones in the US (much of the country) be sure to hold your breath or breath from a scuba tank because any one of the things I just mentioned will expose you to much more radiation that any of the "hazards" that have been talked about in the last two GW rad-hysteria columns that I'm aware of.
First off, I agree with you that there is ambient natural exposure to radiation when, as you say, you take an airplane flight or get an X-ray.
I agree with you on those issues. There is ambient radiation and it is acceptible.
My SPECIFIC point is the issue of ingested persistent emitters. NOT gamma ray exposure, but of ingested isotopes that make their way into the food chain and bio-accumulate.
YES, there are other sources of pollution in the world that are unhealthy. The difference between them and radiation is that radiation, once we release it, is here for centuries... whereas nature can usually handle the other forms of pollution and convert those pollutants into other substances.
"My SPECIFIC point is the issue of ingested persistent emitters. NOT gamma ray exposure, but of ingested isotopes that make their way into the food chain and bio-accumulate."
That I will definitely agree with. INGESTED radioactive isotopes that are persistent within the body and more radioactive than the naturally radioactive elements the body mistakes them for (Cs-137 is treated as and stored like K by the body but is much more radiactive than K-40) are definitely a significant hazard.
It's when GW hypes about all forms of radiation with "there is no safe level" that I have to bring the hype back to earth by comparison of the typically hyped man-made sources with the much larger amounts of natural radiation one is exposed to daily that nothing can be done about. My beef is with the hyping of insignificant by comparison external radiation sources. Ingested sources of radiation, persistent or not, are a whole other story and should be taken very seriously.
"It only takes ONE isotope, ingested, and for it to somehow make its way to a sensitive tissue and successfully mutate the surrounding tissue for someone to come down with full blown cancer."
Your opinion perhaps but this issue has been studied extensively and as of now there is no (zero) evidence supporting that conjecture.
Also the tuna in this study contained no (zero) levels of any alpha emiter. If plutonium was there is would have been seen.
Really? Are you REALLY arguing the case that ingestion of radioactive isotopes aren't cancerous? That's pretty preposterous.
And, yeah, Cesium 137 isn't an alpha emitter. It's a gamma emitter, and a strong one at that.
Yes I am claiming that 30 becquerels of Cs-137 is not mutagenic at least based on studies of organisms where very low levels of mutations above the spontaneous level can be detected. Yes Cs-137 is a gamma emiter, but K-40 emits and even more energetic gamma ray. As far as adverse biological effects, "natural" K-40 and "synthetic" Cs-137 do not act differently -- it is only the average energy released per decay that is important.
Wow, you are SO highly informed about mutagenic levels, Cs-137 gamma emitters, 'synthetic' radiation, and the like. Just curious, does the Government pay you what you believe you're worth, or was your education 'wasted'? SOCK PUPPET?
Bravo. It's like, don't worry, you'll be dead soon. Shut up and enjoy it, bitch. Where do these clowns come from, and is there a length of rope short enough to be useful?
Okay, let's agree to disagree.
First off, I'm not "anti-nuke" per se, but I think our current reactor fleet is dangerously obsolete. Why are we not using safer sodium moderated Thorium reactors instead? The technology is there.
My pet peeve is Plutonium. Why on God's green earth are we using freaking Plutonium blends in boiling water nuclear reactors? That's a death wish, IMHO.
Nuclear could and MUST be done MUCH more safely. We had Chernobyl, now Fukushima... given that radiation is forever, how many more before we start messing with our collective futures? These kinds of radiation releases should be completely unacceptable.
So, I don't necessarily think nuclear power should be banished, but some feet NEED to be held to the fire. Fukushima might not be catastrophic, but it WILL have a public health impact however slight it may be.... and, the scary thing is that it COULD have been catastrophic. And it might still be, if they can't get the spent fuel pool situation sorted out.
Maybe it's just me, but I'm guessing that we use plutonium because it makes such good bombs which, in case you haven't yet figgered it out, is what nuclear energy is really all about. I mean, I'm no nuclear expert, but the very fact that the eastern side of Honshu isn't going to be habitable (except by Sir Winston) for a long freaking time suggests that in spite of my utter ignorance, I know what I need to know.
I agree with everything you wrote. Those who are anti-nuclear don't realize they are anti-50-year-old nuclear technology which we have not evolved away from due to vested interests for the uranium fuel cycle and the fact that the various nuclear power generation alternatives haven't even been covered seriously in university courses for nearly as long. If the scientist who patented the pressurized light water reactor in the late 40s (IIRC) and who pushed for a fluid salt thorium fuel cycle until told to shut up because Nixon wanted to proceed only down the path to Pu breeder reactors(!!!) were alive today, he'd instantly drop over dead again to see we're still using a disgustingly antiquated and inefficient nuclear power generation technique that only consumes 0.5% of the energy in the fuel it uses, leaving the rest behind as extremely radioactive transuranic waste with huge half-lives. Duh!
And the known to be corrupt Japanese power company that operated the FD reactors was warned by US nuclear experts (including GE nuclear engineers) to triple the height of their sea wall and move their diesel fuel supplies above ground, but they ignored it. So, when their antiquated GE Mark 1 reactors using the antiquated 1940/50s method of generating nuclear power lost coolant because there were no working generators (flooded) to run the pumps, the resulting catastrophe was 100% on the heads of the leaders of that outfit, most if not all of whom should be doing serious jail time right now.
I was only eating fish once a month anyway- the mercury. If they are warning pregnant ladies that if they have tuna they can harm their unborn child- I really don't need to eat fish. Consider this is the government "looking after" us, and I know they are not, so in reality it's got to be really bad.
How much tuna would you need to eat before you ingested enough to hurt you, according to US Goverment guidelines (that we may or may not believe)?
Walt D.
Because of Mercury already very little.
Rumor has it when filming the Machinist Bale ate a can of Tuna and an apple a day to lose weight.
That was a few years ago and he hasn't died yet.
But would he be willing to do the same again?
You mean before, or after goalpost-moving exercises commenced?
George Washington
I'm waiting for the 2013 season of Deadliest Catch. Any luck they will wear radiation detection badges and the processing facility will scan the catch with Geiger counters.
Pretty much a give away if the Wizard starts glowing.
So the problem has been "defined away", like unemployment.
Yes, and inflation ...
This is a very disturbing find.
First off, some of you need to learn about the nature of radiation. Some of the nuclear "apologists" point to this "it's just 0.XX% over the radiation of a chest X-ray" tripe and use this stat to downplay the significance.
Radiation is being spread to North America via isotopes that are suspended in the atmosphere. YES, the radiation that Fukushima has wafted in our direction is relatively meaningless when you examine it in terms of alpha, beta, and gamma rays that are being emitted from these isotopes.
HOWEVER, what is NOT being taken into account is what happens when one of these low radioactivity isotopes is INGESTED. Although it may only emit relatively low levels of alpha rays, an ingested isotope embeds itself into human tissue (lungs, thyroid, muscle, etc, depending on the particular radioactive element it is) and bombards the surrounding tissue with alpha rays until it fully decays.
So, the isotope may have a "momentary" snapshot alpha ray emission that is relatively low, as compared to an X-ray... but when you multiply that times the length of time of exposure, it can be very carcinogenic.
Thank you for your concise clarfication. And that is the essence of it.
That explains why the cancer rates have steadily increased in the past 68 years or so as these invisible isotopes latch into the human population in random and unpredictable ways and over the years the damage can manifest itself as a cancer.
The poor fuckers that worked on those reactors after the quakes have a death sentence hanging over them with no specific timeline.......
bjonsson
The japanese are burning the debris adding even more radioactive particles to the air.
The horror is that Japan may have contaminated our biggest food source on the planet, sea life. Whose going to eat or want to serve sea food of any type that may be radioactive. They are saying it's okay but the public is ignorant. because if you get that radioactive Cesium into our body it will continue to irradiate the area until the tissue is mutated and destroyed.
I'm amazed at the general lack of scientific literacy. Goes to show that general high school science education has really declined since I was a student in the early '80s. Note: I'm not arguing that radioactive exposure is "beneficial", but, like other posters point out, such exposure has to be evaluated in the proper context.
Just because radioactivity is detected doesn't mean much without also mentioning dosage -- how much has been ingested by the 15 tuna (btw: a statistically insignficant and completely biased sample)? Dosage can be estimated by detection strength. Then, given the dosage, one can figure out the general health consequences.
For a really good comparison of radiation dosages and origins, see the XKCD graphic, http://blog.xkcd.com/2011/03/19/radiation-chart/ Lots of blue squares make one green square, lots of green squares make one red square. Lots of red squares is lethal.
Glowing in the dark -- I've stood on top of a training reactor and watched the Cherenkov radiation (the only real way to see radioactive materials "glow" in the dark, when beta particles and gamma photons move faster than the speed of light in water.) The purple color would be invisible to an external viewer if it were originating inside your body. Although, if you were producing any significant amout of Cherenkov radiation, your exposure would already have been lethal.
this is the general spiel of a nuclear apologist.
someone who wants you to believe that there is a level of these molecules that is ok.
there are NO levels of these molecules that are ok.
please take your "a little bit of sodomy upon the children is permitted argument" and put it back where it belongs.
scottm
Dr. Banner is that you?
So what if they're low levels? There are areas of the US where there are low levels of background radiation. It's all hysteria and largely the result of the environmental movement's exaggerated claims about the dangers of any and all radiation.
"It's all hysteria..."
Volunteer for building #4 then, whiz-kid...I'm sure they'd pay you $100k a year for each year you lived.
Keep sucking those Kochs, fracking until the water taps burn, and playing in the TN sludge slide, ignoramus.
oooo yes let's all ingest low levels of something neato and after 40 years we will have accumulated enough for a Betty Crocker doorprize.
BD = nuke shill.
I'm not worried until I take a big dump that glows in the dark, and makes the toilet water boil.
Now there's a better fuel rod for a reactor.
I can go into business selling those bad boys to G.E. until I finally shuffle off this mortal coil.
I'm going down laughing all the way, with another funny for ya !
Suggested Product Name: "Immortal Coil"
Don't get excited. "Detectable Levels" means nothing with the tremendous quality of modern analytical instrumentation. There are detectable levels of anything in anything today. Eat your veggies. Don't get stressed out. Don't eat Blue Fin Tuna. They are endangered.
Well at least we now don't have to worry about the mecury content
Think I'll go make a cali tuna sandwich with GMO mayo, plastik margarine, and homogenized bread.
And here I thought back in march of last year the scary thing was the Saudi day of uprising, then the japanese "Good Fortune" arrived, silly me.
http://youtu.be/0DLkKC2fzng
tuna pole-vaulting!
slewie is so paranoid he's afraid to take his fish oil!
at least this weed is ok; heh
Go, go Godzilla.
[depleted] tuna croquets and a trebuchet - going medieval with a twist.
Weaponized Tuna.
Beware the FEMA Fish Fridays.
Fissile Fry.
Sellers Inc. don't give a fuck as long as record bonuses are paid out of treasury.
Anyone even know how much radiation continues to spew from Fuckashita? No fucking chance. Can't have truth no matter what.
All these people pretending to care, how warming. Time for another corporate bailout to assure it happens again!
didn't anyone get the notice, radiation is good for you, approved by the FDA
Sushi anyone.
I remember reading on zh someone taking a geiger counter to the market to test fruit and such and thought it was a little extreme especially for a couple hundred dollar equipment, but geesh that's some scary shitz. I'll ask for one for fathers day.
You folks, at least much if not most of the time, do know your stuff about financial matters, but man oh man, many of you are really in the dark about radiation. Read up a bit before you jump off the environmental bridge. For Chrissakes, a banana is radioactive. So is your head.
Stop reading Common Dreams and The Nation. Don't believe everything the EPA says. Read some physics. Nuclear power is exceedingly safe. Do accidents happen? Sure. But does that mean we should shut down every reactor in the world? And what? Go solar? Wind? Geothermal?
Every source of electricity has its risks, its upsides and downsides. Do a cost benefit analysis, then choose. The problem at Fukushima, the major problem, was that one of the spent fuel pools leaked, so the rods, no longer cooled by water, began to emit radioactivity. Had the rods been stored off site, in more protected containers, the horror show would not have happened.
There were the usual human screwups, of course. The whole thing could have been handled better. Hey, here's a test: go back and find out what really happened at Three Mile Island, instead of using The China Syndrome as a source.
Better yet, stick to money matters.
Human screw ups, huh? Are there any other kind?
I stopped reading there, you sociophatic bitch.
We take tech made for U-Boats (!!!!!!).... then act as if the conclusions from that environment, apply to a landbased implementation..... we protect those with a handful of fucking diesel engines, and an emergency powersupply that lasts just one day..... as the only thing standing between a country (or more) getting radiated, and everything being fine.....
....and call THAT safe????
Get the fuck out of here!
(This does not mean that i consider all nuclear power tech "bad" as least as a bridge..... there have been better implementations available for half a century, but because they either reduce profits, or do not let one build nuclear weapons from them.... have been boycotted. We are basically using stonage nuclear tech made for the deployment in the oceans, as a primary landbased energy source.... just so that megalomaniacs can built nuclear bombs or get a bunch of extra bonusses. Thus fucking massmuderers are gambling entire mankind, just for their own paycheck and power ambitions).
Sorry, pal, you and your kids can glow in the dark but I don't want mine to. Anyone who thinks nuclear is benign and the danger overhyped needs to see this documentary about Chernobyl. It took 500,000 people working to contain it, it's still a huge menace, and they were close to rendering Europe *uninhabitable*. Get educated:
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/the-battle-of-chernobyl/
I see you fail to mention the 3 reactors that melted down in addition to the stupid GE design of spent fuel pools. Does Jeff Immelt sign your pay check?
> And what? Go solar? Wind? Geothermal?
LFTR.
Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors in 5 minutes
Eat any California Bluefin Tuna lately?