2 votes

Scientists ADMIT: We DON'T KNOW the Impact of Fukushima Radiation on Humans

Scientists ADMIT: We DON'T KNOW the Impact of Fukushima Radiation on Humans
http://www.occupycorporatism.com/scientists-admit-dont-know-...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

underground ice wall...

Fallout arrived in the US 6 days after the earthquake

AN UNEXPECTED MORTALITY INCREASE IN THE UNITED STATES FOLLOWS ARRIVAL OF THE RADIOACTIVE PLUME FROM FUKUSHIMA: IS THERE A CORRELATION?
Joseph J. Mangano and Janette D. Sherman

"... The first component of any analysis of potential adverse health effects from Fukushima fallout in the United States is the doses received by humans. After March 17, 2011, when the airborne radioactive plume first reached the United States, the EPA accelerated its program of sampling environmental radioactivity.

Instead of quarterly measures in precipitation, milk, water, and air, samples were taken weekly, sometimes more frequently. Radioisotope levels in late March and early April tended to be higher than typical levels, but declined in April, even though Fukushima meltdowns and emissions continued. On May 3, the EPA announced that it would revert to quarterly measurements.

The number of samples and percentage with detectable radioisotope levels reported by the EPA in March–April 2011 were far fewer than those taken and reported in the period after Chernobyl in May–June 1986."

"... The Fukushima meltdowns, and the introduction of radioactivity across the globe, indicate that accurate measurements are needed on subsequent changes in environmental radioactivity and in health status. In the United States, there have been limitations in both measures. Radioactivity samples in precipitation, air, water, and milk were sporadically reported by the Environmental Protection Agency.

Many measurements failed to produce detectable levels, and on May 3,
2011, the agency reverted to its policy of making only quarterly measurements. Some elevated concentrations were found to be up to several hundred times the norm soon after the arrival of the Fukushima fallout, but no meaningful temporal trends and spatial patterns can be discerned from these data."

Full PDF: http://www.radiation.org/reading/pubs/HS42_1F.pdf

More on the subject at DP: http://www.dailypaul.com/311693/should-i-bring-a-geiger-coun...