Hammered

The TBS and TEPCO cams are not synched and it appears as if the TEPCO cam is running loops.

Here is a screen shot from an emissions event today:

I know we are experiencing adverse effects to the biosphere from over two years of Fukushima fallout.  Please see my compilation of effects and keep in mind that the most insidious effect of radiation exposure is the collapse of white blood cells, the bodies defense mechanism:http://majiasblog.blogspot.com/2013/10/animal-anomalies-is-fukushima-daiichi.html

Read about the effects of radiation exposure on white blood cell counts here:

Medical records of world’s first radiation victim from A-bomb recovered August 04, 2013 By YURI OIWA http://ajw.asahi.com/article/behind_news/social_affairs/AJ201308040020

[PATIENT RECORD for Naka from Hiroshima] The records showed that her white blood cell counts were down to 400 per cubic millimeter of blood, less than 10 percent of their normal level. Naka began losing clumps of hair the following day. Her injuries on her back sharply worsened. On Aug. 21, her body temperature rose to nearly 40 degrees. She received blood transfusions. Her white blood cell counts dropped further to 300 per cubic mm on Aug. 22. Infectious ulcers formed around her injuries….

Majia here: We are exposed and the radiation emissions continue to worsen. Radiation levels in fresh water and sea water samples are rising at Fukushima Daiichi. E.G. see The Asahi Shimbun here http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201310180088

Atmospheric radiation levels are rising in the US according to government and private monitoring data. http://majiasblog.blogspot.com/2013/11/daiichi-is-hot-are-rising-rads.html 

There is no doubt the fallout is indeed here in the United States. The US Geological Survey found the highest cesium fallout in Los Angeles, among the cities sampled in the spring of 2011.

Government data on bio-accumulation in Japan and the US are missing despite documented increases in adverse animal mortality events and mutations. E.g., see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19245818

The authorities of the nuclear village – industry, scientists, health physicists, etc – will deny that the documented increases in large mammal mortality in the US – including sea lions, seals, and walruses – have anything to do with fallout.

The authorities of the nuclear village will say that the documented levels of exposure are insufficient to produce adverse mortality events. Their tools are the international (e.g., ICRP) and national dose-response tables.

However, there are many, many problems with the dominant dose-effects models curated by the nuclear village.

I chronicle these problems in my book, Fukushima and the Privatization of Risk (Palgrave, 2013). Many of the research conclusions presented in this book were explored first on my blog pages.

The key limitations the dominant dose-effect models I’ve outlined  include the following:

1.     The dominant dose-effects models do not adequately theorize or incorporate effects of internally ingested radionuclides because they average effects across organs rather than looking at impacts of targeted sites

2.     The dominant dose-effects models do not represent impacts to women and children because they are primarily based on healthy white adult males. Children are much, much more vulnerable because their cells are dividing more rapidly

3.     The dominant dose-effects models do not recognize impact of bio-accumulation on subsequent exposure to radionuclides ad gamma radiation

4.     The dominant dose-effects models do not predict range of diseases and immunological problems caused by exposure to radiation

5.     The dominant dose-effects models do not incorporate adequate measures of reproductive effects, including sensitization to radiation exposure, which is a scientifically documented effect

6.     The dominant dose-effects models were not built from scientific consensus but from highly contested compromises of battles that were fought publicly and can be read about in news coverage across the decades

I’m not going to provide evidence for each of these claims here. The arguments and evidence are developed in my book and outlined more briefly on blog posts, such as:

Debating Radiation Safety: http://majiasblog.blogspot.com/2012/07/debating-radiation-safety-background.html

Internal Emitters: http://majiasblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/on-internal-emitters.html

That said, let me provide a brief example for point 3. The dominant dose-effects models do not recognize impact of bio-accumulation on subsequent exposure to radionuclides ad gamma radiation:

EPA: Cancer Risk Coefficients for Environmental Exposure to Radionuclides, http://www.epa.gov/radiation/docs/federal/402-r-99-001.pdf

page 3: "For both internal and external exposure, a risk coefficient for a given radionuclide is based on the assumption that this is the only radionuclide present in the environmental medium. That is, doses due to decay chain members produced in the environment prior to the intake of, or external exposure to, the radionuclides are not considered”

Majia here: The dominant dose-effects models lack ECOLOGICAL VALIDITY.

Chris Busby has a thoughtful essay in The Ecologist that explores how research documentation of spiking thyroid disorders in California newborns by Joe Mangano and Janette Sherman will be denied as radiation-caused using the ICRP model.

http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2164974/fukushima_fallout_damaged_thyroid_glands_of_california_babies.html

Before reading the article its worth remembering that the NRC had projections of a 40 millisievert dose to the thyroid of California infants who consumed cow’s milk over a one year period.

Chris Busby has been roundly attacked for his criticism of the ICRP dose model. I’ve even had a scientist tell me Busby is unreliable. Yet, I’ve seen no critique of Busby’s work that actually addresses his methods or conclusions. Rather, he and his body of research are simply dismissed as ‘unreliable’ because of the anti-nuclear bias. This generalized dismissal smacks of an ad-hominem attack. Scientists, such as the one who advised me, steer clear of so ‘tainted’ individuals because they don’t want their reputations sullied by association.

This strategy of personalized attack is a common technique used against dissidents and whistle-blowers. The goal is to de-legitimize the whistleblower’s ethos among a targeted community. The community targeted need not participate in the attack itself. The target community need only allow the carefully cultivated doubt and uncertainty to prejudice their view toward the evidence offered by the dissident/whistle-blower. 

The dominant dose-effects models serve as weapons to clobber the arguments and evidence of anti-nuclear whistleblowers, despite the documented fact that these models are acknowledged by UNESCEAR and a range of other governmental agencies to be tentative and to inadequately grapple with internal exposure and reproductive effects. 

So, we can get intermittently hammered with fallout for over two years and the nuclear village can deny effects by using dose-effects models lacking ecological validity.

This is a very dangerous game. The geneticists who participated in the US 1956 BEAR report warned that mutations cause by exposure to radiation are heritable and that trans-generational accumulation of mutations could feasibly lead to widespread reproductive failures.

They warned about these dangers in 1956 as atmospheric testing reached a frenzy that would not be extinguished until the Soviets and the US agreed to ban atmospheric testing in 1963. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Nuclear-Test-Ban_Treaty

See my discussions here:

Systematic Bias in the First Bear Report http://majiasblog.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/systematic-study-in-first-bear-study-on.html#comment-form

Bear Report http://majiasblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/bear-report-1956.html

Now, after decades of radiation exposure from atmospheric fallout, routine nuclear plant emissions, medical tests, etc. we are being HAMMERED by Fukushima fallout.

The EPA’s response has been to raise the Protective Action Guidelines to allow greater levels of radiation exposure than previously tolerated from nuclear accidents. Read about the outrageously lax new levels here: http://www.globalresearch.ca/obama-approves-raising-permissible-levels-of-nuclear-radiation-in-drinking-water-civilian-cancer-deaths-expected-to-skyrocket/5331224

I guess that shouldn’t be surprising by the EPA betrayal given Gina McCarthy is now running the EPA. She oversaw the failed Radent monitoring of Fukushima in 2011. The EPA’s Inspector General was the one who called the monitoring failed and yet McCarthy was still promoted.http://majiasblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/gina-mccarthy-and-failed-radnet-system.html

Japan’s domestic response to the slow escalation of the crisis has been censorship and growing attacks against dissident voices: http://majiasblog.blogspot.com/2013/11/censorship-and-dispossession-in-japan.html

Mochi-Madness, a very articulate commentator at Enenews, recent described the effects of low-level radiation exposure to our white blow cell counts. Technical phrasing is 'Neutrophil counts.' See comments here: http://enenews.com/researchers-ulcers-seals-walruses-alaska-after-fukushima-never-observed-before-reports-similar-problems-seals-northern-japan/comment-page-1#

MochiMadness has also described the subtle endocrine effects from chronic, low-level exposure. I’ve permission to re-post a recent pointed comment

http://enenews.com/die-offs-of-mammals-birds-reptiles-in-western-u-s-so-many-diseases-afflicting-such-a-wide-variety-of-animals-names-like-something-out-of-a-sci-fi-thriller-epizootic-hemorrhagic-disease/comment-page-1#comment-415741

Majia Here: Yes we are being hammered and our governments are silent, our whistleblowers are being attached and censored, and we the people are being exposed without the opportunity for mitigation that would occur with full transparency. 

We, citizens of democratic nations, are forced to piece together the development of the disaster and out exposure risks from online forums and private radiation networks.

The great unravelling of the eco-system has been amplified beyond reckoning because the Daiichi disaster is being managed through propaganda rather than transparency and accountability. The effects are being trivialized by the authorities of the nuclear village using dose-models lacking ecological validity.

We, the PEOPLE, are being hammered....

Accountability, Responsibility, and Transparency: There is a better way.

RESOURCES 

Introduction to Majia's Blog and Index of Posts Herehttp://majiasblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/break-from-bloging.html 

 

October 2013 Interview with James Fetzer about my book, Fukushima and the Privatization of Risk (Palgrave, 2013)

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/10/29/fukushima-and-the-privatization-of-risk-with-majia-nadesan-ph-d/

http://radiofetzer.blogspot.com/2013/10/jim-fetzer-majia-nadesen.html#comment-form

Sep 7, 2013 Voice of Russia http://voicerussia.com/2013_09_07/Fukushima-not-under-control-6308/

July 23 2013 Voice of Russiahttp://voicerussia.com/radio_broadcast/70924886/118436060.html

PowerPoint of data examining reports of conditions at the plant and evidence of criticalities, which can be seen here http://www.academia.edu/4314657/Fukushima_Update_Aug_2013  or herehttps://www.dropbox.com/s/11xz1zjgwcsbpo0/Fukushima%20Update%20Aug%202013.pptx