Nuclear fallout? / Media blackout?

shedweller · 12-12-2012 08:33AM

I recall there being something about the rate you ingest the radioactive material being important. So if you ingested 1kg of meat that had x becquerels in one go, you would be more likely to have problems than if you ingested it over a longer period of time.
Indigestion notwithstanding...

Anyway, i still stand by the assertion that there is a media 'blackout' with regards to the fukushima disaster. The information is there, more or less. But you have to go looking for it. And many many people, as you all know, are simply too busy with other things to go looking for it.
And yet the media is shoving a whole lot of other nonsense in our faces day in day out. Celebrity this, z-factor that, and my favourite: supposedly educational programmes saying something weighs as much as ten jumbo jets!
Meanwhile there is untold damage being done to our only home in this universe and theres barely a mention!

Thats a media blackout, for all intents and purposes.

And finally, heres a little something on banana radiation and why its different to nuclear power plant radiation:
http://agreenroad.blogspot.ie/2012/03/radioactive-bananas-peeling-mystery.html?m=1

12-12-2012 08:43AM

shedweller wrote: »

I recall there being something about the rate you ingest the radioactive material being important. So if you ingested 1kg of meat that had x becquerels in one go, you would be more likely to have problems than if you ingested it over a longer period of time. Hence why 30+ kBq/kg of potassium is perfectly harmless but as little as 500 Bq/kg of caesium could be considered unhealthy.
Indigestion notwithstanding...

It depends on the isotope in question and how it interacts with your body. One could be more radioactive than another, but the more radioactive one could pass through your system more quickly.

shedweller wrote: »

Anyway, i still stand by the assertion that there is a media 'blackout' with regards to the fukushima disaster. The information is there, more or less. But you have to go looking for it. And many many people, as you all know, are simply too busy with other things to go looking for it.
And yet the media is shoving a whole lot of other nonsense in our faces day in day out. Celebrity this, z-factor that, and my favourite: supposedly educational programmes saying something weighs as much as ten jumbo jets!
Meanwhile there is untold damage being done to our only home in this universe and theres barely a mention!

Thats a media blackout, for all intents and purposes.

But none of this makes any sense if you are ascribing sinister motives to it.
The media cover things other than Fukushima (and other disasters that have dropped out of the lime light even more dramatically, such as Haiti) because people are interested in other stories. News goes on.

If however you are saying that stories are being blocked by the shadowy overlords, then it doesn't make sense.
If they can stop news stories, why to any of them get out to even the less read scientific new outlets? Why would they only care about stopping it in the general media?
Why can't the stop all of these studies that are supposedly undoing all of their work?
Why are they leaving clues that can be deciphered by random people on the internet?

12-12-2012 08:50AM

shedweller wrote: »

And finally, heres a little something on banana radiation and why its different to nuclear power plant radiation:
http://agreenroad.blogspot.ie/2012/03/radioactive-bananas-peeling-mystery.html?m=1

First and foremost, potassium is potassium. RADIOACTIVE CESIUM is MAN MADE. Potassium and K40 is a natural mineral in many foods. CESIUM IS NOT A NATURAL MINERAL.

This is the naturalistic fallacy.
It also repeats the idea that caesium is a poison, while ignoring that that so is potassium, in the right dose.
It also claims that potassium 40 does not emit gamma rays, which is untrue and neglects to mention the fact that it emits plenty of beta rays, which are far more damaging than gamma rays are shorter distances.
It then points to the shocking fact that mushrooms emit over a thousand Bq but neglects to mention what the isotope in question is or whether this is above the limit allowed.

This article is written either by someone very ignorant or very dishonest.

shedweller · 12-12-2012 08:59AM

King Mob wrote: »

This is the naturalistic fallacy.
It also repeats the idea that caesium is a poison, while ignoring that that so is potassium, in the right dose.

Care to back that up?

stuar · 12-12-2012 09:08AM

shedweller wrote: »

Care to back that up?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYyLoel3694

12-12-2012 09:14AM

shedweller wrote: »

Care to back that up?

That potassium is a poison in the right dose?
Everything is poisonous in the right dosage.

Unfortunately I cannot find a figure for the LD50 of pure potassium (it apparently is not available), though I doubt you'd being willing to eat a block of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potassium_in_biology#Side_effects_and_toxicity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_lethal_dose

Edit:
http://www.sciencelab.com/msds.php?msdsId=9926661

Section 11: Toxicological Information
Routes of Entry: Absorbed through skin. Eye contact. Inhalation. Ingestion.
Toxicity to Animals:
LD50: Not available. LC50: Not available.
Chronic Effects on Humans: May cause damage to the following organs: blood, lungs, upper respiratory tract.
Other Toxic Effects on Humans:
Very hazardous in case of skin contact (irritant), of ingestion, . Hazardous in case of skin contact (corrosive), of eye contact
(corrosive), of inhalation (lung corrosive).
Special Remarks on Toxicity to Animals: Not available.
Special Remarks on Chronic Effects on Humans: Not available.
Special Remarks on other Toxic Effects on Humans:
Potential Health Effects: Skin: Causes severe skin irritation and burns. Eyes: Causes severe eye irritation and burns.
Inhalation: Exposure to Potassium fumes can irritate the nose, and throat with sneezing, coughing and sore throat. Potassium fumes can irritate the lungs. Repeated inhalation of Potassium fumes may cause sores of the inner nose, and bronchitis to
develop with cough, phlegm, and/or shortness of breath. Ingestion: May cause severe gastrointestinal tract irritation with
nausea, vomiting and possible burns. May cause systemic toxic effects of the heart, liver, and kidneys. It may affect the blood.

hooradiation · 12-12-2012 10:35AM

stuar wrote: »

The imminent danger is hooradiation

I'm just commenting on your poor understanding of everything you've posted about - that's hardly imminent danger.
I mean, aside from to your ego.

Jonny7 · 12-12-2012 11:02AM

stuar wrote: »

Worst case scenario poisoned planet, where life does not exist, well human at the top, the rest will follow.

Garbage and scare stories. The worst thing that can happen is the structure underneath collapses causing the fuel rods to spill out, this would affect the soil (a vast amount would have to be removed and disposed of) and cause some runoff into the sea (which would diperse like the 200 or so atomic tests that have actually been conducted underwater).. that's a pretty bad situation for the prefecture and surrounding fishing indsutry, with possible long term cancer deaths.

Jonny7 · 12-12-2012 11:06AM

shedweller wrote: »

Anyway, i still stand by the assertion that there is a media 'blackout' with regards to the fukushima disaster.

You can stand by it all you want, the facts speak for themselves.

news.google.ie

type in "Fukushima"

Russian officials did not release information about Chernobyl until 24 hours after it happened, that's a "blackout".

Run_to_da_hills · 12-12-2012 11:28AM

Jonny7 wrote: »

You can stand by it all you want, the facts speak for themselves.

news.google.ie

type in "Fukushima"

Russian officials did not release information about Chernobyl until 24 hours after it happened, that's a "blackout".

Japanese officials did not reveal the truth about the Fukushima situation for several weeks after the incident that's also a 'blackout'.

I think it was Alex Jones who was the first media reporter to use the term 'melt down' and at the time he was accused of being a 'scare monger'. I took almost a year later before he was proved yo be correct.

hooradiation · 12-12-2012 11:41AM

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Japanese officials did not reveal the truth about the Fukushima situation for several weeks after the incident that's also a 'blackout'.

I think it was Alex Jones who was the first media reporter to use the term 'melt down' and at the time he was accused of being a 'scare monger'. I took almost a year later before he was proved yo be correct.

A stopped clock is right twice a day - so if he takes all the money from conning the gullible and buys 720 clocks he might be less of a goddamn joke.

Jonny7 · 12-12-2012 12:48PM

Here is the OP

Have been keeping an eye on this fukushima situation on and off. Have to use the net really, since the media have turned off the story. Probably because of political pressure, because it looks like its really bad.

So anyway, this fukushima reactor, or reactors, have melted down and are spewing plutonium(i think) in a big plume. This plume has made the area uninhabitable, and will eventually make the entire island(s) of japan a no go area. Perhaps japan will have to be evacuated? Who knows. They, the japanese gov and the company involved, dont have control of the situation and appear to be lying about the extent of the catastrophy.

Uninformed nonsense, being backed up by more up-to-date uninformed nonsense.

old hippy · 12-12-2012 12:52PM

Indeed, it's quite sickening to read that kind of garbage doing the rounds. Some of us have family and friends in Japan.

MadYaker · 12-12-2012 12:58PM

You do realise that the government aren't the only people with geiger counters on the west coast of the US? All the universities physics departments in San Francisco, L.A and San Diego will have them, and even more sophisticated methods of measuring levels of radiation as well as radioactive isotopes in the atmosphere. And as well as that anyone can buy a geiger counter on amazon for about $200. So if abnormal levels of radiation were present on the west coast of the US there is no way it could possibly go unreported. A lot of people jumping to conclusions here.

old hippy · 12-12-2012 01:07PM

MadYaker wrote: »

You do realise that the government aren't the only people with geiger counters on the west coast of the US? All the universities physics departments in San Francisco, L.A and San Diego will have them, and even more sophisticated methods of measuring levels of radiation as well as radioactive isotopes in the atmosphere. And as well as that anyone can buy a geiger counter on amazon for about $200. So if abnormal levels of radiation were present on the west coast of the US there is no way it could possibly go unreported. A lot of people jumping to conclusions here.

My brother in law has a geiger counter over in Japan; I think he'd have noticed something.

Run_to_da_hills · 12-12-2012 01:46PM

old hippy wrote: »

My brother in law has a geiger counter over in Japan; I think he'd have noticed something.

Dose he know where the power switch is located on it.

shedweller · 12-12-2012 03:24PM

King Mob wrote: »

That potassium is a poison in the right dose?
Everything is poisonous in the right dosage.

Unfortunately I cannot find a figure for the LD50 of pure potassium (it apparently is not available), though I doubt you'd being willing to eat a block of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potassium_in_biology#Side_effects_and_toxicity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_lethal_dose

Edit:
http://www.sciencelab.com/msds.php?msdsId=9926661

Congratulations! You've just stated the bleeding obvious! So are you saying that eating too much bananas will cause the above problems?

As before, back it up.

12-12-2012 03:29PM

shedweller wrote: »

Congratulations! You've just stated the bleeding obvious! So are you saying that eating too much bananas will cause the above problems?

As before, back it up.

Again, everything is a poison in the right dosage.
Though to get enough potassium from bananas you will have to eat a crazy amount of them.

But saying that caesium is a poison and that potassium is not is either uninformed or dishonest.

And what is it you'd like me to back up? That potassium is poisonous?
http://www.sciencelab.com/msds.php?msdsId=9926661

old hippy · 13-12-2012 12:48PM

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Dose he know where the power switch is located on it.

Torakx · 13-12-2012 07:22PM

Ive watched a few videos on this.
It seems that if reactor 4 melts through the concrete floor,there is a good possibility it will keep going until either gravity stops it and/or it goes into the earths core.
What im wondering , is if it does reach the earths core, could it then mix in with all the iron/lava at tthe core and come out all over the planet a few hundred years later or less?
Remember this stuff when out of control can burn at something like 5-10 thousand degrees.If im getting the correct info that is.
If it reaches underground water, it could be just as bad.
Or maybe just the pacific ocean will be enough to pollute the globe?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=subD7BByodQ

shedweller · 13-12-2012 07:45PM

In fairness, once it goes under the crust it would be so diluted in the magma, i doubt it would cause any problems. If i remember correctly there is already an abundance of nuclear materials already down there. I'd be more worried about the water table.
Anyway, to the nuclear apologists here. If its not that dangerous then why bother with all the expense of storing and using nuclear materials?
They could save a fortune by not having to overengineer everything!

Run_to_da_hills · 13-12-2012 07:53PM

shedweller wrote: »

In fairness, once it goes under the crust it would be so diluted in the magma, i doubt it would cause any problems. If i remember correctly there is already an abundance of nuclear materials already down there. I'd be more worried about the water table.
Anyway, to the nuclear apologists here. If its not that dangerous then why bother with all the expense of storing and using nuclear materials?
They could save a fortune by not having to overengineer everything!

Looks like the water table may be getting it sooner than later. :eek:

Fukushima worker “Contaminated water might overflow due to the lack of tanks”

http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/12/fukushima-worker-contaminated-water-might-overflow-due-to-the-lack-of-tanks/

Corkfeen · 13-12-2012 08:01PM

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Looks like the water table may be getting it sooner than later. :eek:

Fukushima worker “Contaminated water might overflow due to the lack of tanks”

http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/12/fukushima-worker-contaminated-water-might-overflow-due-to-the-lack-of-tanks/

I'm terrified by the claims of a random unidentifiable twitter user. That's their source, you know? If an investigative journalist used similar methodologies as that website, they would be a laughing stock. I think shall make some ominous tweets now.... :pac:

Run_to_da_hills · 13-12-2012 08:26PM

Corkfeen wrote: »

I'm terrified by the claims of a random unidentifiable twitter user. That's their source, you know? I think shall make some ominous tweets now.... :pac:

This is sort of old news now and it doesn't seem to be improving.

There is only so many tanks that they can store stuff on the compound unless they can float in barges.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/25/fukushima-nuclear-disaster_n_2016407.html

On the positive side they have a whole prefecture of nuclear wasteland to store what ever they want indefinitely.

13-12-2012 08:36PM

shedweller wrote: »

Anyway, to the nuclear apologists here. If its not that dangerous then why bother with all the expense of storing and using nuclear materials?
They could save a fortune by not having to overengineer everything!

Who here has said it's not dangerous?

All I've been arguing is that there is no evidence to support the claims that it is more dangerous as presented by the "alternative media".
And that there is no evidence or reasoning to support the idea of a media blackout, with a ton of evidence against it.

shedweller · 13-12-2012 10:51PM

King Mob wrote: »

Who here has said it's not dangerous?

So you are saying it is dangerous then? I got the impression from you et al that you thought there was nothing much to worry about. But thats just me i suppose.

King Mob wrote: »

All I've been arguing is that there is no evidence to support the claims that it is more dangerous as presented by the "alternative media".
And that there is no evidence or reasoning to support the idea of a media blackout, with a ton of evidence against it.

Well, we are down to tweets to provide us with information.

That's how bad it is.
And as i've said before, the media isn't shoving it down our throats daily like other crap. Info is there but it has to be rooted out.

So it's not quite a blackout but it's damn close.

Jonny7 · 13-12-2012 11:13PM

shedweller wrote: »

So you are saying it is dangerous then? I got the impression from you et al that you thought there was nothing much to worry about.

Its dangerous, but not remotely world threatening as its being portrayed here

There are no real big developments, so what do the media have to write about.. it's a cleanup, extremely complex, delicate, and difficult, but still just a cleanup.

14-12-2012 01:09AM

shedweller wrote: »

So you are saying it is dangerous then? I got the impression from you et al that you thought there was nothing much to worry about. But thats just me i suppose.

I was very clear about my point and just spelled it out in uncertain terms.

If you can point to anything I said that was not in line with that, and gives you the impression that I ever said or thought there was no danger, please point to it.
Otherwise, then yes it is just you leaping to conclusions or making silly strawmen.

shedweller wrote: »

Well, we are down to tweets to provide us with information.

That's how bad it is.

Well 1) that's not through as there have been tons of reports posted from the media and 2) you have no reason to take those tweets as trustworthy or accurate other than they confirm your preassumed worldview.

shedweller wrote: »

And as i've said before, the media isn't shoving it down our throats daily like other crap. Info is there but it has to be rooted out.

So it's not quite a blackout but it's damn close.

But this is simply a result of the normal news cycle. They aren't shoving any stories about Haiti or the countries who were affected by the 2005 tsunami down our throats either.

No one has shown that any stories or studies on the disaster have been blocked or suppressed. If you can't show that, then you can't say that there is a blackout. Doubly so when stories that a supposed blackout should be stopping still manage to get out.

But then we have folks like Rtdhs who is claiming there is a complete blackout and on information is getting out. Do you believe he is accurate? Why does he believe there is a blackout when you don't think there is?

And I'm sure if the media were shoving the story down our throats everyday (to the same level as some of the sties linked in this thread) then we'd be hearing how the government is overhyping the disaster for nefarious purposes...

stuar · 08-08-2013 04:56PM

Jonny7 wrote: »

Its dangerous, but not remotely world threatening as its being portrayed here

There are no real big developments, so what do the media have to write about.. it's a cleanup, extremely complex, delicate, and difficult, but still just a cleanup.

Just a cleanup?, great job they're doing, finally they have admitted 300 tons of radioactive water daily has been spilling into the ocean since day one.

As for the posters who accused others of scaremongering, have you read the news lately, seems Tepco and the Japanese government have been lying all along, just as suggested by the tinfoil hat brigade.

Here's some more scaremongering by that Putin fella's private site:
Water leaks at Fukushima could contaminate entire Pacific Ocean
http://rt.com/op-edge/japan-fukushima-contamination-environment-229/

My question is how do they contain it in the pacific?, isn't the planet one mass of water.

As I said 2 years ago Fukushima is unstoppable, gets worse by the day, and cannot be contained.

On the bright side some of the media blackout has been lifted and Tepco have admitted they can do NOTHING to contain it, it actually also means nothing or nobody can contain it.

It hasn't gone away you know:eek:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23584008

Sparticle · 08-08-2013 11:02PM

stuar wrote: »

Just a cleanup?, great job they're doing, finally they have admitted 300 tons of radioactive water daily has been spilling into the ocean since day one.

As for the posters who accused others of scaremongering, have you read the news lately, seems Tepco and the Japanese government have been lying all along, just as suggested by the tinfoil hat brigade.

Here's some more scaremongering by that Putin fella's private site:
Water leaks at Fukushima could contaminate entire Pacific Ocean
http://rt.com/op-edge/japan-fukushima-contamination-environment-229/

My question is how do they contain it in the pacific?, isn't the planet one mass of water.

As I said 2 years ago Fukushima is unstoppable, gets worse by the day, and cannot be contained.

On the bright side some of the media blackout has been lifted and Tepco have admitted they can do NOTHING to contain it, it actually also means nothing or nobody can contain it.

It hasn't gone away you know:eek:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23584008

I doubt there's enough radioactive material on earth to contaminate a body of water the size of the pacific.

Nuclear fallout? / Media blackout?

Comments