Monday, May 28, 2012

Radioactive Tuna Not Safe Even at Low Levels of Contamination: Why? Because of Bio-Accumulation.

Enenews is reporting on radiation-contaminated tuna caught off San Diego

 CNN: All 15 bluefin tuna samples off California had Fukushima radiation… back in AUGUST 2011 — “This year’s fish are going to be really interesting” says Stanford scientist

Source article:

Majia here: The radiation levels in the tuna caught off of the coast of San Diego may be "low" and below the "derived intervention level" for seafood set by the FDA.

However, that does not mean these levels are safe.

Unfortunately, radiation concentrates up the food chain

Takashi Hirose gives an example in his book Fukushima Meltdown (page 73) using data on bio-accumulation from the Columbia River in the US:

If the river water assumes a value of 1,
the fish would be 15,000 that value.
The egg yolk of a water bird would be 1,000,000 times that value.

Majia here: The U.S. FDA specific Derived Intervention Levels are here:

The specific “FDA derived intervention level or criterion for each radionuclide group” are as follows “for all components of the diet” for Strontium 90, Iodine 131 and Plutonium 238 and 239
Sr-90 160 Bq/kg
I-131 170 Bq/kg
Cs-134 + 137 1200 Bq/kg
Pu-238 + Pus 239 + Am 241 is 2 Bq/kg

Majia here: Again, the problem with these levels is they do not adequately address bio-accumulation because they presuppose that the contaminated item is the only source of contamination a person is exposed to.

EPA: Cancer Risk Coefficients for Environmental Exposure to Radionuclides

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: We are not just eating radioactive tuna, I'm afraid. Remember that pollen from Los Angeles was found to contain cesium-134 and cesium-137 from Fukushima.


Background on "internal emitters" (ingested or inhaled radiation)

Bio-accumulation of cesium

Fukushima ocean contamination

 Nuclear Controversies by Vladimir Tchertkoff; Released in 2003, 51 minutes
30:20 – According to Professor Yury Bandazhevsky (former director of the Medical Institute in Gomel), "Over 50 Bq/kg of body weight lead to irreversible lesions in vital organs"

1 comment:

  1. The studies on adsorption and absorption of water-borne radiation reveal some interesting facts about fish (especially tuna). Chipman (1956) discovered cesium readily passes through the skin of tuna. (Wordpress won't let me paste this long URL from my phone).

    This adsorption discovery along with the lingering float capacity of cesium in all layers of a toxic plume means feeding on contaminated smaller sealife is not even necessary to bio-accumulate in fish (at least tuna based on the study). So just swimming year after year through cesium-contaminated waters will add to the concentration of poison in tuna.

    The huge amounts of water-borne radiation gushing every second from fissures into the ocean from the three 100-ton corium cores sunk beneath the huge crippled Fukushima megaplex will continue to produce massive poiisonous plumes of radioactive isotopes for thousands of years. The Japanese are powerless to stop this environmental murder of the Pacific Ocean.

    Concerned more with stopping the deadly radioactive air emissions which are leaking at equally massive rates, the Japanese have placed the control of toxic water flow as a low priority.

    Their inability to juggle two castastrophes at once is a bad sign for mankind. No need for a Paul Revere to give us a signal... This radioactive invader is coming by land and by sea.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.